Lilly et al v. Jamba Juice Company et al

Filing 18

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 17 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER (Stipulation to Extend Time to Reply to Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss) filed by Inventure Foods, Inc., Jamba Juice Company. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on October 1, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/2/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

David B. Rosenbaum, AZ Bar No. 009819 Admitted Pro Hac Vice
Maureen Beyers, AZ Bar No. 017134 Admitted Pro Hac Vice
James K. Rogers, AZ Bar No. 027287 Admitted Pro Hac Vice
OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.
2929 North Central Avenue, 21st Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2793
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Robert S. Niemann (State Bar #87973)
([e-mail])
KELLER AND HECKMAN LLP
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2110
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415-948-2808
Attorneys for Defendants

14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17

ALETA LILLY and DAVID COX, on behalf
of himself and all other similarly situated,

18

Plaintiffs,

19
20
21
22
23
24

vs.
JAMBA JUICE COMPANY and
INVENTURE FOODS, INC., formerly known
as The Inventure Group, Inc.,
Defendants.

Case No. 3:13-cv-02998-JST
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO
REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS
Hearing Date: November 21, 2013
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Courtroom: 9
Complaint Filed: June 28, 2013
Trial Date: None Set

25
26

The parties stipulate and agree that Defendants may have a 2-day extension, until October

27

9, 2013, to file their Reply to Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to

28

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, filed on September 30, 2013. Oral argument on the Motion to

1

Dismiss is scheduled for November 21, 2013, more than five weeks from the date of the

2

proposed due date.

3

DATED this 1st day of October, 2013.

4
5

FINKELSTEIN THOMPSON LLP

OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.

By: /s/ Rosemary M. Rivas (w/ permission)
Rosemary M. Rivas
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94111

By: /s/ Maureen Beyers
David B. Rosenbaum (pro hac vice)
Maureen Beyers (pro hac vice)
James K. Rogers (pro hac vice)

6
7
8
9
10
11

Marc L. Godino
GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG, LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067

Robert S. Niemann
KELLER AND HECKMAN LLP
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2110
San Francisco, California 94111

12
13

Attorneys for Individual and Representative
Plaintiffs Aleta Lilly and David Cox

Attorneys for Defendants

14
15
16

ATTESTATION UNDER GENERAL ORDER 45

17

I, Maureen Beyers, attest that the concurrence in the filing of this document has been

18

obtained from Rosemary M. Rivas, which shall serve in lieu of her signature.

19

/s/ Maureen Beyers
Maureen Beyers

20
21
22
23
24
25

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on October 1, 2013, I electronically transmitted the attached
document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice
of Electronic Filing to all CM/ECF registrants:

26
27

/s/ Lindsay B. Jensen

28
Case No. 3:13-cv-02998-JST

2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2
3

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties;

4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED extending the deadline to Reply to Plaintiffs’ Memorandum
of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss to October 9, 2013.

Date: October 1, 2013

I

Honorable Jon S. Tigar
United States District Court Judge

NO

11

RT

ER

Ti ga r

H

12

n S.
J u d ge J o

13
14

FO

10

LI

9

ERED

ORD
T IS SO

R NIA

8

S

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT
ED

7

RT
U
O

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

6

A

5

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:13-cv-02998-JST

3

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS