Koller v. Med Foods, Inc. et al

Filing 127

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 126 Continuing Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 10/16/17. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/16/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP ADAM J. GUTRIDE (STATE BAR NO. 181446) SETH A. SAFIER (STATE BAR NO. 197427) MARIE MCCRARY (STATE BAR NO. 262670) KRISTEN G. SIMPLICIO (STATE BAR NO. 263291) 100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 639-9090 Facsimile: (415) 449-6469 NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP JEFFREY B. MARGULIES, BAR NO. 126002 STEPHANIE STROUP, BAR NO. 235071 555 South Flower Street, Forty-First Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 892-9200 Facsimile: (213) 892-9494 Attorneys for Defendant DEOLEO USA, INC., formerly known as MED FOODS, INC. 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 15 16 SCOTT KOLLER, an individual, on behalf of himself, the general public and those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, 17 18 19 20 Civil Action No. 3:14-CV-02400-RS ORDER STIPULATION CONTINUING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT v. DEOLEO USA, INC.; and MED FOODS, INC., Defendants. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 D OCUMENT PREPARED ON R ECYCLED P APER STIPULATION RE MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 This Stipulation (the “Stipulation”) is made and entered into by Deoleo USA, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel of record, and by Scott Koller, by and through his undersigned counsel of record. This Stipulation is made with reference to the following facts: 1. On September 19, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for partial summary judgment. 2. On October 3, 2017, Defendant filed its opposition. 3. Plaintiff’s reply brief in support of his motion for partial summary judgment is due on October 10, 2017. 9 4. The hearing on the motion is currently scheduled for October 26, 2017. 10 5. The parties have agreed to mediate their dispute, and have scheduled mediation 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 before Judge Infante for November 6, 2017. 6. The parties have agreed to continue Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment pending the mediation. The parties, through their respective counsel of record, stipulate and agree as follows: 7. Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment is continued. 8. If mediation is unsuccessful, Plaintiff will file his reply brief on November 16, 2016, and the hearing will take place on December 7, 2017. 9. In accordance with its statements in the Joint Case Management Statement, filed on October 5, 2017 (Dkt. No. 124), Deoleo preserves its right to seek a further continuance of this hearing date depending on the schedule set for class notice. 21 22 IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 23 24 DATED: 10/10/2017 25 26 27 28 D OCUMENT PREPARED ON R ECYCLED P APER DATED: 10/10/2017 /s/ _____________________________________ Seth A. Safier GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff /s/ _____________________________________ Jeffrey B. Margulies Stephanie Stroup -1STIPULATION RE MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1 NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP Attorneys for Defendant 2 PROPOSED ORDER 3 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a), and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, it 4 is therefore ORDERED that: 5 Plaintiff shall file his reply in support of partial summary judgment by November 16, 6 2017, and the hearing shall be continued until December 7, 2017 at 1:30 pm. 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 10/16/17 10 THE HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 ATTESTATION OF COMPLIANCE 14 I, Seth Safier, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this 15 document. In compliance with section X(B) of General Order 45, I hereby attest that Stephanie 16 Stroup concurred in this filing. /s/ Seth Safier 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 D OCUMENT PREPARED ON R ECYCLED P APER -2STIPULATION RE MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

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?