Wellens et al v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.
Filing
171
ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND MOTION HEARING granting 170 STIPULATION - Case Management Conference and Motion Hearing as to 167 First Motion for Settlement continued to 9/30/2015 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Case Management Statement due by 9/23/2015. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 09/02/2015. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/2/2015)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
SACHA STEENHOEK, SBN 253743
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
One Market, Spear Tower
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: (415) 442-1267
Fax: (415) 442-1001
ssteenhoek@morganlewis.com
DAVID SANDFORD, Pro Hac Vice To Be Filed
SANFORD HEISLER KIMPEL, LLP
dsanford@sanfordheisler.com
1666 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 499-5200 (main)
(202) 499-5201 (fax)
SARI M. ALAMUDDIN, Pro Hac Vice
ALLISON N. POWERS, Pro Hac Vice
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
77 West Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60601-5094
Tel: (312) 324-1000
Fax: (312) 324-1001
salamuddin@morganlewis.com
apowers@morganlewis.com
FELICIA MEDINA, SBN 255804
fmedina@sanfordheisler.com
YONINA ALEXANDER, SBN 284908
yalexander@sanfordheisler.com
SANFORD HEISLER KIMPEL, LLP
555 Montgomery Street, Suite 1206
San Francisco, CA 94111
(415) 795-2020 (main)
(415) 795-2021 (fax)
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs and the Class
BLAIR J. ROBINSON, Pro Hac Vice
A. KLAIR FITZPATRICK, Pro Hac Vice
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
1701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
T: (215) 963-5000
F: (215) 963-5001
blair.robinson@morganlewis.com
kfitzpatrick@morganlewis.com
Attorneys for the Defendant
17
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
19
20
21
22
SARA WELLENS, KELLY JENSEN,
JACQUELINE PENA, BERNICE
GIOVANNI, LARA HOLLINGER,
and JENNIFER BENNIE
on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
23
24
v.
25
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC.,
26
27
28
Defendant.
Case No. C 13-00581 WHO (DMR)
JOINT STIPULATION AND
ORDER TO CONTINUE
CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE AND MOTION
HEARING
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
WHEREAS, on August 28, 2015, Plaintiffs submitted a Motion For Preliminary Approval
of the Class Settlement (“Motion”) (Dkt No. 167);
WHEREAS, on August 28, 2015, the Parties submitted a Joint Case Management
Statement requesting that the September 8, 2015 Case Management Conference be vacated and a
hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion be set at the Court’s earliest convenience (Dkt No. 167);
WHEREAS, on August 31, 2015, the Court set a Case Management Conference and
Motion Hearing (“Hearing”) for September 16, 2015 (Dkt No. 169);
WHEREAS, Defense Counsel has a conflict on September, 16, 2015;
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN Defendant Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. and
Plaintiffs Sara Wellens, Kelly Jensen, Jacqueline Pena, Bernice Giovanni, Lara Hollinger, and
Jennifer Bennie, by their attorneys, and subject to Court approval, as follows:
The Hearing on September 16, 2015 will be continued to September 30, 2015.
Dated:
September 1, 2015
Respectfully submitted,
14
/s/ Felicia Medina
Felicia Medina, on behalf of
Plaintiffs and the Class
15
16
/s/ Sari M. Alamuddin
Sari M. Alamuddin, on behalf of
Defendant
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE AND MOTION HEARING CASE NO. C 13-00581 WHO (DMR)
1
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
For the reasons described above, and for good cause shown, the Case Management
3
Conference and Motion Hearing date is hereby modified as per the Parties’ agreement. The Case
4
Management Conference currently scheduled for September 16, 2015 shall be vacated and
5
continued to September 30, 2015 at __________.
6
7
8
September 2, 2015
DATE: ______________________
_____________________________________
The Honorable William H. Orrick
United States District Judge
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO POSTPONE CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE AND MOTION HEARING CASE NO. C 13-00581 WHO (DMR)
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?