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)
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?