Opperman et al v. Path, Inc. et al

Filing 887

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 886 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Setting Page Limits for Reply brief Regarding Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification filed by Lauren Carter, Judy Paul, Claire Hodgins, Steve Dean, Nirali Mandaywala, Guili Biondi, Jason Green, Stephanie Cooley, Gentry Hoffman, Claire Moses, Rachelle King, Alan Beueshasen, Greg Varner. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on April 25, 2017. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 DAVID M. GIVEN (SBN 142375) NICHOLAS A CARLIN (SBN 112532) PHILLIPS, ERLEWINE, GIVEN & CARLIN LLP 39 Mesa Street, Suite 201 San Francisco, CA 94129 Tel: (415) 398-0900 Fax: (415) 398-0911 dmg@phillaw.com nac@phillaw.com MICHAEL VON LOEWENFELDT (SBN 178665) JAMES M. WAGSTAFFE (SBN 95535) FRANK BUSCH (SBN 258288) DANIEL J. VEROFF (SBN 291492) KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP 101 Mission Street, 18th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel: (415) 371-8500 Fax: (415) 371-0500 mvl@kerrwagstaffe.com wagstaffe@kerrwagstaffe.com busch@kerrwagstaffe.com veroff@kerrwagstaffe.com Interim Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs [Additional counsel included on signature page] 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 19 MARC OPPERMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, 20 21 22 23 v. PATH, INC., et al. Defendants. 24 25 Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST CLASS ACTION STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING PAGE LIMITS FOR REPLY BRIEF REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO ALL CASES 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 Espitia v. Hipster, Inc., No. 13-cv-0432-JST (collectively, the “Related Actions”) 26 27 28 W K E R R ––––– & ––––– A G S T A F F E LL P Case No.: 13-cv-00453-JST STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING PAGE LIMITS 1 2 3 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-4(b), Plaintiffs in this proceeding and Defendant Apple Inc. (collectively, the “Parties”) hereby stipulate as follows: 1. The Parties previously stipulated to an order, which this Court issued at ECF No. 4 869, that due to the number of legal and factual issues on this motion, Apple shall have an 5 additional ten (10) pages for its Opposition over and above what the Local Rules allow, for a 6 total of thirty-five (35) pages; 7 8 9 2. In that same stipulation, Apple agreed that it would not oppose a request from Plaintiffs for an additional ten (10) pages for their Reply brief; 3. After reviewing Apple’s Opposition, Plaintiffs believe that their Reply in support 10 of their motion for class certification requires discussion of a number of legal and factual issues 11 that cannot be addressed within the Local Rules default page limits; 12 13 4. Counsel for the Parties have met and conferred and agree that an additional ten (10) pages for Plaintiffs’ Reply is appropriate. 14 NOW THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate as follows: 15 Plaintiffs shall have twenty-five (25) pages for their Reply brief. 16 17 Dated: April 25, 2017 18 KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP By: /s/ Michael von Loewenfeldt James M. Wagstaffe (95535) Michael von Loewenfeldt (178665) Frank Busch (258288) KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP 101 Mission Street, 18th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel.: 415-371-8500 Fax: 415-371-0500 wagstaffe@kerrwagstaffe.com mvl@kerrwagstaffe.com busch@kerrwagstaffe.com 19 20 21 22 23 24 David M. Given Nicholas A. Carlin PHILLIPS, ERLEWINE, GIVEN & CARLIN LLP 39 Mesa Street, Ste. 201 San Francisco, CA 94129 Tel: 415-398-0900 25 26 27 28 W K E R R ––––– & ––––– A G S T A F F E LL P 2 Case No.: 13-cv-00453-JST STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING PAGE LIMITS 1 Fax: 415-398-0911 dmg@phillaw.com nac@phillaw.com 2 Interim Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 3 Carl F. Schwenker (admitted pro hac vice) LAW OFFICES OF CARL F. SCHWENKER The Haehnel Building 1101 East 11th Street Austin, TX 78702 Tel: 512-480-8427 Fax: 512-857-1294 cfslaw@swbell.net 4 5 6 7 8 Plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel 9 Jeff Edwards (admitted pro hac vice) EDWARDS LAW The Haehnel Building 1101 East 11th Street Austin, TX 78702 Tel: 512-623-7727 Fax: 512-623-7729 cfslaw@swbell.net 10 11 12 13 14 17 Jennifer Sarnelli GARDY & NOTIS, LLP 126 E. 56th Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10022 Tel: 212-905-0509 Fax: 212-905-0508 jsarnelli@gardylaw.com 18 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS 15 16 19 Dated: April 25, 2017 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 20 By: /s/ Robert B. Hawk Robert B. Hawk HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 4085 Campbell Ave., Suite 100 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Tel.: 650.463.4000 Fax: 650.463.4199 robert.hawk@hoganlovells.com 21 22 23 24 25 Clayton C. James HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 1500 Denver, CO 80202 26 27 28 W K E R R ––––– & ––––– A G S T A F F E LL P 3 Case No.: 13-cv-00453-JST STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING PAGE LIMITS Tel: 303.899.7300 Fax: 303.899.7333 clay.james@hoganlovells.com 1 2 3 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT APPLE INC 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 W K E R R ––––– & ––––– A G S T A F F E LL P 4 Case No.: 13-cv-00453-JST STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING PAGE LIMITS 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 3 PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: Plaintiffs’ Reply in support of its class certification motion shall not exceed a total of twenty- 4 5 five (25) pages in length 6 Dated: April 25, 2017 ____________________________ The Honorable Jon S. Tigar United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 W K E R R ––––– & ––––– A G S T A F F E LL P 5 Case No.: 13-cv-00453-JST STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING PAGE LIMITS 1 FILER’S ATTESTATION 2 I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the other 3 signatories listed above. 4 Dated: April 25, 2017 By: /s/ Michael von Loewenfeldt Michael von Loewenfeldt 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 W K E R R ––––– & ––––– A G S T A F F E LL P 6 Case No.: 13-cv-00453-JST STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING PAGE LIMITS

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?