Ang et al v. Whitewave Foods Company et al

Filing 29

STIPULATION AND ORDER for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 09/19/2013. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/19/2013)

Download PDF
1 Angela C. Agrusa (SBN 131337) aagrusa@linerlaw.com 2 Randall J. Sunshine (SBN 137363) rsunshine@linerlaw.com 3 Nathan M. Davis (SBN 287452) ndavis@linerlaw.com 4 LINER GRODE STEIN YANKELEVITZ SUNSHINE REGENSTREIF & TAYLOR LLP 5 1100 Glendon Avenue, 14th Floor Los Angeles, California 90024.3503 (310) 500-3500 6 Telephone: Facsimile: (310) 500-3501 7 Attorneys for WWF OPERATING COMPANY 8 d/b/a/ WHITEWAVE FOODS (erroneously sued as WHITEWAVE FOODS COMPANY), HORIZON 9 ORGANIC DAIRY LLC, and DEAN FOODS COMPANY 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 12 13 ALEX ANG and KEVIN AVOY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 14 Plaintiffs, 15 vs. 16 WHITEWAVE FOODS COMPANY, DEAN 17 FOODS COMPANY, WWF OPERATING COMPANY, and HORIZON ORGANIC 18 DAIRY LLC, 19 Case No. CV 13 1953 LB STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PAGES; [PROPOSED] ORDER Defendants. 20 21 Plaintiffs Alex Ang and Kevin Avoy (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants WWF Operating Co. 22 d/b/a WhiteWave Foods, Horizon Organic Dairy, LLC, and Dean Foods Company (collectively 23 “Defendants”), by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby stipulate as follows: 24 Whereas Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Class Action and Representative 25 Action Complaint was within the page limits prescribed by the Local Rules; 26 Whereas Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Class 27 Action and Representative Action Complaint exceeded the page limits prescribed by the Local 28 Rules by more than two pages; 41299.019-1060947v5.1 Case No. CV 13 1953 LB STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PAGES; [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 Whereas numerous issues exist requiring responses, and Defendants’ counsel diligently 2 have endeavored to limit the Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ 3 Class Action and Representative Action Complaint to fifteen pages, as prescribed by the Local 4 Rules, and after multiple rounds of editing have succeeded in paring the document to less than 5 seventeen pages; and 6 Whereas Defendants require an additional two pages over the page limit prescribed by the 7 Local Rules, lest their argument become cryptic and less clear for the Court’s careful 8 consideration, 9 Now therefore, the parties agree that, subject to the Court’s approval, Defendants may file 10 a Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Class Action and 11 Representative Action Complaint in excess of the page limit set by the Local Rules, not to exceed 12 seventeen pages. 13 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 14 15 Dated: September 18, 2013 16 LINER GRODE STEIN YANKELEVITZ SUNSHINE REGENSTREIF & TAYLOR LLP By: 17 18 19 20 21 Dated: September 18, 2013 22 PROVOST UMPHREY LAW FIRM LLP By: 23 24 /s/ Angela C. Agrusa Angela C. Agrusa Attorneys for WWF OPERATING COMPANY d/b/a/ WHITEWAVE FOODS (erroneously sued as WHITEWAVE FOODS COMPANY), HORIZON ORGANIC DAIRY LLC, and DEAN FOODS COMPANY /s/ David P. Wilson David P. Wilson Attorneys for Plaintiffs ALEX ANG and KEVIN AVOY 25 26 [Remainder of page intentionally left blank. [Proposed] Order to follow on subsequent page] 27 28 41299.019-1060947v5.1 Case No. CV 13 1953 LB 2 STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PAGES [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. S UNIT ED RT U O 09/19 3 DATED: _______________, 2013 S DISTRICT TE C TA 4 5 R NIA 1 Honorable Samuel Conti United States District Judge el Conti ge Samu Jud 6 9 10 A H ER LI RT 8 FO NO 7 N F D IS T IC T O R C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 41299.019-1060947v5.1 Case No. CV 13 1953 LB 3 STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN EXCESS OF FIFTEEN PAGES

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?