Opperman et al v. Path, Inc. et al

Filing 829

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 827 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING filed by Twitter, Inc. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on September 12, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/12/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

MARC OPPERMAN, et al.,

13
14
15
16
17
18

Plaintiffs,
v.
PATH, INC., et al.,

Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING CASE
SCHEDULING
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO CASES:

Defendants.

Opperman v. Path, Inc., No. 13-cv-00453-JST
Hernandez v. Path, Inc., No. 12-cv-1515-JST
Pirozzi v. Apple, Inc., No. 12-cv-1529-JST
Espitita v. Hipter, Inc., No. 4:13-cv-432-JST
(collectively, the “Related Actions”)

19
20
21
22

The undersigned parties hereby stipulate to the following partial stay in this case, and
respectfully request that the Court issue the requested scheduling order.
The Ninth Circuit is currently considering Defendant Apple Inc.’s Petition for Permission

23

to Appeal Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f), filed on July 29, 2016. The issues in that petition

24

may have a material impact on the outcome of the pending Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class

25

Certification re Foursquare, Instagram, Kik, Twitter and Yelp Apps, filed on August 23, 2016.

26

See Docket 799. In the interest of judicial economy, the parties have agreed to postpone the

27

opposition briefing with respect to Plaintiffs’ Motions for Class Certification.

28

-1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST
132610231.1

1

Path and Plaintiffs are presently engaged in bilateral settlement discussions and intend to

2

continue those discussions. The undersigned parties have also agreed to engage in a joint

3

mediation in an attempt to settle this matter, in which Path will participate if bilateral settlement

4

discussions have not succeeded. To allow the parties to focus on the success of settlement

5

discussions, the undersigned parties have agreed that all current deadlines in this action, with the

6

exception of the dates related to the briefing and argument of the pending Twitter and Apple

7

summary judgment motions should be vacated, and all fact discovery stayed.

8

In place of those deadlines, the Parties propose a joint case management statement be filed

9

within 14 days of the Ninth Circuit’s response to Apple’s Petition proposing a revised schedule

10

that allows sufficient time for the parties to complete their mediation and settlement discussions.

11

The parties further propose that in no event shall the defendants have less than 30 days from the

12

revised scheduling order to oppose Plaintiffs’ Motions for Class Certification and in no event

13

shall the parties have less than three months from the revised scheduling order to complete fact

14

discovery.

15
16
17

Respectfully submitted,
DATED: September 9, 2016

21

By: /s/ James G. Snell
James G. Snell
PERKINS COIE LLP
3150 Porter Dr.
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1212
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

22

Attorneys for Defendant Twitter, Inc.

18
19
20

23
24
25
26
27
28

DATED: September 8, 2016

By: /s/ Michael von Loewenfeldt
Michael von Loewenfeldt
James M. Wagstaffe
Frank Busch
KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP
101 Mission Street, 18th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
-2-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST
132610231.1

1
David M. Given
Nicholas A. Carlin
PHILLIPS, ERLEWINE, GIVEN & CARLIN LLP
39 Mesa Street, Ste. 201
San Francisco, CA 94129
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

2
3
4
5
6

Interim Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs

7
8

Carl F. Schwenker (admitted pro hac vice)
LAW OFFICES OF CARL F. SCHWENKER
The Haehnel Building
1101 East 11th Street
Austin, TX 78702
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

9
10
11
12

Plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel

13

Jeff Edwards (admitted pro hac vice)
EDWARDS LAW
The Haehnel Building
1101 East 11th Street
Austin, TX 78702
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

14
15
16
17

Jennifer Sarnelli
GARDY & NOTIS, LLP
501 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1408
New York, NY 10017
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

18
19
20
21

Attorneys for Defendant Opperman Plaintiffs

22
23

DATED: September 8, 2016

FENWICK & WEST LLP

27

By: /s/ Tyler G. Newby
Tyler G. Newby (Bar No. 205790)
FENWICK & WEST LLP
555 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94041
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

28

Attorneys for Defendant Path, Inc.
-3-

24
25
26

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST
132610231.1

1
2

DATED: September 8, 2016

By: /s/ Mazda K. Antia
Mazda K. Antia (Bar No. 214963)
4401 Eastgate Mall
San Diego, CA 92121-1909
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

3
4
5
6

Attorneys for Defendants Instagram, LLC & Kik
Interactive, Inc.

7
8

COOLEY LLP

Dated: September 8, 2016

9

DURIE TANGRI LLP
By: /s/ Michael H. Page
Michael H. Page (Bar No. 154913)
DURIE TANGRI LLP
217 Leidesdorff Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

10
11
12
13

Attorneys for Defendants Yelp Inc. &
Foodspotting, Inc.

14
15
16
17

Dated: September 8, 2016

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

21

By: /s/ David F. McDowell
David F. McDowell (CA SBN I 25806)
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
707 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 6000
Los Angeles, California 90017-3543
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DMcDowell@mofo .com

22

Attorneys for Defendant Foursquare Labs, Inc.

18
19
20

23
24
25
26
27
28

-4STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST
132610231.1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Dated: September 8, 2016

HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
By: /s/ Robert B. Hawk
Robert B. Hawk
Stacy Hovan
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
4085 Campbell Ave., Suite 100
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Clayton C. James
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 1500
Denver, CO 80202
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys For Defendant Apple Inc.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-5STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST
132610231.1

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2

The Stipulation between Plaintiffs and Defendants is GRANTED as follows:

3

The current scheduling order is vacated, other than the filing and hearing dates for Apple

4
5

and Twitter’s pending summary judgment motions.
The parties will submit a case management statement including a proposed schedule

6

within 14 days of the Ninth Circuit’s response to Apple’s Petition that complies with the parties’

7

stipulation set forth above.

8
9
10

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: September 12 2016
_____________,

11
12

By:
HON. JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CASE SCHEDULING
Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST
132610231.1