Dunn v. Teachers Insurance & Annuity Association of America, A New York Entity et al
Filing
51
ORDER APPROVING TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE re 48 Proposed Order, filed by Pride Technologies, LLC. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 5/12/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/12/2014)
4
SEGAL SKIGEN LLP
LAWRENCE SEGAL [BAR NO. 101339]
WAYNE D. SKIGEN [BAR NO. 100249]
9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 201
Beverly Hills, California 90212-2504
Telephone: (310) 550-4840
Facsimile: (310) 550-4848
5
Attorneys for Defendant Pride Technologies, LLC
1
2
3
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
KATHLEEN DUNN and PATRICK
CAMPBELL, individual and on behalf of all
others similarly situated,
Case No.: 3:13-cv-05456-EMC
Assigned to The Honorable Edward Chen
12
PRIDE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC’S
REQUEST FOR COURTCALL
TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER (modified)
Plaintiffs,
13
v.
14
15
16
TEACHERS INSURANCE & ANNUITY
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, a New York
entity; EXPERIS US, INC.; PRIDE
TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; and DOES 1 through
10, inclusive,
17
Date: June 5, 2014
Time: 1:30 P.M. 9:30 a.m.
Courtroom: 5
Action Filed: November 25, 2013
Defendants.
18
19
20
21
Defendant Pride Technologies, LLC (“Pride”) respectfully requests permission for its
22
counsel, Lawrence Segal, to appear telephonically for a CourtCall telephonic calendar appearance in
23
connection with the June 5, 2014 hearing on co-defendant Teachers Insurance & Annuity
24
Association of America’s (“TIAA”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, a
25
motion in which Pride joins but for which Pride has submitted no additional substantive papers. In
26
the alternative, Pride requests to be excused altogether from appearing in person or by telephone, as
27
Pride does not anticipate adding anything substantive beyond the arguments made by counsel for
28
TIAA.
1
PRIDE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC’S REQUEST FOR COURTCALL TELEPHONIC
APPEARANCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER (Case No. 3:13-cv-05456-EMC)
1
This request is premised on the following: Pride’s California counsel for this matter is
2
located in Southern California. Pride has requested that its counsel appear by telephone, if permitted
3
by the Court, in an effort to minimize the attorney’s fees and travel costs resulting from attorney
4
travel time and travel costs that Pride otherwise will incur attending the hearing in person. Pride
5
estimates that, by attending telephonically, Pride will be able to save close to $4,000 in attorney’s
6
fees and travel costs that it otherwise will have to incur simply to join in TIAA’s motion – a motion
7
in which Pride is only joining.
8
9
10
Pride has contacted counsel for all of the other parties by email, asking them to consent to
Pride appearing telephonically. Counsel for all parties have consented to Pride attending the Motion
to Dismiss hearing by telephone.
Respectfully submitted,
11
12
DATED: May 5, 2014
SEGAL SKIGEN LLP
By /s/ Lawrence Segal
Lawrence Segal
Wayne D. Skigen
Attorneys for Defendant Pride Technologies, LLC
13
14
15
16
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRIDE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC’S
17
REQUEST FOR COURTCALL TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE
18
The Court, having read and considered Pride Technologies, LLC’s Request for Courtcall
20
Telephonic Appearance, hereby GRANTS Defendant Pride Technologies, LLC’s request to make a
9:30 a.m.
CourtCall telephonic calendar appearance for the June 5, 2014 hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Teachers
21
Insurance & Annuity Association of America’s (“TIAA”) Motion to Dismiss. [Alternatively, Pride’s
22
request to be excused from appearing in person or by telephone, thereby waiving its right to
23
participate in oral argument, is GRANTED.] Court to call Lawrence Segal between
9:30 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. on June 5, 2014.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
R NIA
ORD
T IS SO DIFIED
I
AS MO
NO
2
n
M. Che
PRIDE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC’S REQUEST rFOR COURTCALL TELEPHONIC
Edwa d
Judge
FO
28
EDWARD M. CHEN
United StatesERED Judge
District
RT
APPEARANCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER (Case No. 3:13-cv-05456-EMC)
H
E
LI
27
RT
U
O
26
5/12
DATED: _________________, 2014
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
A
25
S
24
UNIT
ED
19
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?