Swearingen et al v. Late July Snacks LLC

Filing 130

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 128 Continuing CMC filed by Late July Snacks LLC Case Management Statement due by 11/23/2017. Initial Case Management Conference set for 11/30/2017 09:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/16/17. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/16/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 SHELTON DAVIS PLLC David Shelton (admitted pro hac vice) 1223 Jackson Avenue East, Suite 202 Oxford, MS 38655 Telephone: (662) 281-1212 Email: david@sheltondavispllc.com POLLACK SOLOMON DUFFY LLP Joshua L. Solomon (admitted pro hac vice) 133 Federal Street, Suite 902 Boston, MA 02492 Telephone: (617) 439-9800 Email: jsolomon@psdfirm.com PRATT & ASSOCIATES Ben F. Pierce Gore (SBN 128515) 1871 The Alameda, Suite 425 San Jose, CA 95126 Telephone: (408) 429-6506 Email: pgore@prattattorneys.com ROPES & GRAY LLP Rocky C. Tsai (CA Bar No. 221452) Three Embarcadero Center, Ste. 300 San Francisco, CA 94111-4006 Telephone:(415) 315-6300 Email: rocky.tsai@ropesgray.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Attorneys for Defendant Late July Snacks LLC 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 12 13 14 Case No. 13-cv-4324-EMC 15 17 MARY SWEARINGEN and ROBERT FIGY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 18 Plaintiffs, 16 19 20 21 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen Current CMC Date: October 26, 2017 v. LATE JULY SNACKS LLC, Defendant. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case No. 13-cv-4324-EMC 1 Subject to the Court’s approval, the parties stipulate as follows: 2 WHEREAS, on September 14, 2017, the Court conducted a hearing on Late July’s 3 4 5 6 motion to dismiss the third amended complaint, at which the Court scheduled a case management conference for five weeks from the hearing, so as to permit the parties adequate time to discuss a proposed case schedule and the potential for ADR after receiving the Court’s decision on the motion to dismiss (at that time, the Court anticipated a decision on that motion 7 in approximately one week); 8 9 10 11 12 WHEREAS, the parties agree that their efforts to confer on a case schedule and on the potential for ADR would be facilitated by a decision on the motion to dismiss and adequate time thereafter; and WHEREAS, the motion to dismiss remains pending as of this date and thus the parties 13 have agreed, subject to the Court’s approval, that a continuance of the case management 14 conference for approximately 30 days would result in a more efficient conference, increase the 15 potential for them to agree on scheduling matters, and facilitate discussions of ADR; 16 The parties stipulate and respectfully request that the Court enter an order continuing the 17 case management conference to November 30, 2017, or a date thereafter that is convenient for 18 the Court, with a joint case management statement due one week in advance of the case 19 management conference. 20 21 22 Dated: October 13, 2017 By: /s/ Joshua L. Solomon Joshua L. Solomon Attorney for Defendant LATE JULY SNACKS LLC Dated: October 13, 2017 By: /s/ Ben F. Pierce Gore Ben F. Pierce Gore Attorney for Plaintiffs 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case No. 13-cv-4324-EMC [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 11 ER H 10 R NIA n M. Che FO RT 9 dward Judge E NO 8 IT IS S LI 7 Honorable Edward M. Chen D U.S. District Judge O ORDERE A 6 RT U O 5 Dated: _______________________ S DISTRICT TE C ______________________________ TA UNIT ED 4 10/16/17 S 2 N F D IS T IC T O R 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case No. 13-cv-4324-EMC C

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?