O'Connor et al v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 808

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 807 Re: Briefing Schedule in Johnston v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Case No. 3:16-cv-3134-EMC) filed by Todd Johnston. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/3/17. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Michael L. Slack (Texas Bar No. 18476800)
[e-mail]
Admitted Pro Hac Vice
John R. Davis (Cal. Bar No. 308412)
[e-mail]
Admitted Pro Hac Vice
SLACK & DAVIS, LLP
2705 Bee Cave Road, Suite 220
Austin, TX 78746

10

Thomas J. Brandi (Cal. Bar No. 53208)
[e-mail]
Brian J. Malloy (Cal. Bar No. 234882)
[e-mail]
THE BRANDI LAW FIRM
354 Pine Street, Third Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
415-989-1800

11

Attorneys for Plaintiff Todd Johnston

7
8
9

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

TODD JOHNSTON, individually and on
) Case No. 3:16-cv-3134-EMC
behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, ) [Related to Case No. 3:13-cv-3826-EMC]
)
Plaintiff,
) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
) ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING
vs.
) SCHEDULE
)
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware )
Corporation,
) Judge:
Hon. Edward M. Chen
) Courtroom: 5
Defendant.
)
)
Related to:
)
O’Connor et al. v. Uber Tech., Inc., No. 3:13- )
cv-3826-EMC
)
)
)

27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE - Case No.: 3:16-cv-3134-EMC

STIPULATION

1
2

On March 22, 2017, the Court entered the following order in this case: “The Court lifted the stay in

3

the Johnston case for the limited purpose of entertaining Uber’s motion to compel arbitration since

4

Plaintiffs’ argument under the WARN Act may be distinct. Counsel in the Johnston case shall meet and

5

confer and to submit a proposed stipulated briefing schedule for defendant's motion to compel arbitration.”

6
7
8
9

(Dkt. 803 at p. 2.)
Pursuant to that order, the parties have met and conferred and have agreed upon the following
schedule:

10

April 13, 2017- Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration shall be filed;

11

May 15, 2017- Plaintiff’s opposition shall be filed;

12
13
14

June 1, 2017- Defendant’s reply brief shall be filed; and
June 15, 2017 at 1:30 p.m.- hearing on Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration

15
16
17

Dated: March 29, 2017
/s/ Sophia Behnia
CARLOS JIMENEZ
EMILY E. O’CONNOR
SOPHIA BEHNIA
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendant
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

18
19
20
21
22

Dated: March 29, 2017

23
24
25
26
27

/s/ Brian J. Malloy
THOMAS J. BRANDI
BRIAN J. MALLOY
THE BRANDI LAW FIRM
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TODD JOHNSTON

28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE - Case No.: 3:16-cv-3134-EMC

1
2

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
The following schedule is set:

3
4

April 13, 2017- Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration shall be filed;

5

May 15, 2017- Plaintiff’s opposition shall be filed;

6

June 1, 2017- Defendant’s reply brief shall be filed; and

7

June 15, 2017 at 1:30 p.m.- hearing on Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration

8

16

S

R NIA

en

ER

FO

dwar
Judge E

H

15

RT

14

E

d M. Ch

NO

13

O ORD

IT IS S

LI

12

Hon. Edward M. Chen
United StatesRED Judge
District

A

11

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA ___________________________________

RT
U
O

10

4/3/2017
Dated:_________

UNIT
ED

9

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE - Case No.: 3:16-cv-3134-EMC

1
2
3

FILER’S ATTESTATION
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i), I, Brian J. Malloy, attest that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained.

4
5
6

/s/ Brian J. Malloy
BRIAN J. MALLOY

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE - Case No.: 3:16-cv-3134-EMC