Hudson et al v. Scott et al

Filing 25

ORDER granting 24 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply. Reset Deadlines as to 16 MOTION to Dismiss , 17 MOTION to Dismiss , 19 MOTION to Strike 1 Complaint, paragraphs 10-14. Replies due by 9/30/2014. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 9/29/2014. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6

LOUIS A. LEONE (SBN: 099874)
[e-mail]
KATHERINE A. ALBERTS (SBN: 212825)
[e-mail]
STUBBS & LEONE
A Professional Corporation
2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 900
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Attorneys for Defendants
DEBRA LaPALM, LISA GROTE, SUSAN LOFTUS,
SHAWN MASON and CITY OF SAN MATEO
PHILIP L. GREGORY (SBN:095217)
[e-mail]
NANCY L. FINEMAN (SBN: 124870)
[e-mail]
CAMILO ARTIGA-PURCELL (SBN: 273229)
[e-mail]
JENNIFER R. CRUTCHFFIELD (SBN: 275343)
[e-mail]
COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
Burlingame, CA 94010
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
SEAN HUDSON, JILL HUDSON and
HUDSON AUTOMOTIVE, INC.

21

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

22

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

23

SEAN HUDSON, et al.

24
25

Plaintiffs,
vs.

26
27
28

STEPHEN SCOTT et al.
Defendants.

Case No.: 14-cv-03741-CRB
STIPULATION AND ORDER
EXTENDING TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY
BRIEFS [Local Rule 6-2]
Date: October 31, 2014
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Crtrm: 6

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Case No. 14-cv-03741-CRB
EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY BRIEFS

1
2

The parties to the above captioned matter hereby stipulate by and through their
undersigned counsel to the following:

3

On September 8, 2014, Defendants Debra LaPalm, Lisa Grote, Susan Loftus and Shawn

4

Mason filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. At the same time, Defendant City of San

5

Mateo also filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. Moreover, all of these moving

6

Defendants collectively filed a Motion to Strike certain paragraphs of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.

7

These Motions are currently set for hearing on October 31, 2014.

8

Plaintiffs filed their Oppositions to these three Motions on September 22, 2014.

9

Defendants’ Reply Briefs in support of the three Motions are currently due on September

10

29, 2014.

11

Over the weekend of September 27-28, 2014, counsel for Defendants, Katherine Alberts,

12

was incapacitated due to a severe migraine, and was unable to work on Defendants’ Reply

13

Briefs. Given the early stages of this case, Ms. Alberts is the only counsel familiar enough with

14

the issues to draft the Reply Briefs. Due to the loss of two days time to work on the Reply

15

Briefs, Ms. Alberts requested, and Plaintiffs’ counsel agreed to, a one day extension of time for

16

Defendants to file their Reply Briefs to the three Motions.
The parties request that the Court grant Defendants a one day extension of time to file

17
18

their Reply Briefs in support of Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss and Motion to Strike, such that

19

those Reply Briefs must be filed and served on Tuesday, September 30, 2014.

20

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

21

Dated: September 29, 2014

STUBBS & LEONE

22
/s/ Katherine A. Alberts
LOUIS A. LEONE
KATHERINE A. ALBERTS
Attorney for Defendants
DEBRA LaPALM, LISA GROTE, SUSAN
LOFTUS, SHAWN MASON and CITY OF SAN
MATEO

23
24
25
26
27

///

28

///
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Case No. 14-cv-03741-CRB
EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY BRIEFS
1

1

Dated: September 29, 2014

COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY

2
/s/ Philip L. Gregory (with expression permission)
PHILIP L. GREGORY
NANCY L. FINEMAN
CAMILO ARTIGA-PURCELL
JENNIFER R. CRUTCHFFIELD
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
SEAN HUDSON, JILL HUDSON and
HUDSON AUTOMOTIVE, INC.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

14

day extension of time to file their Reply Briefs in support of their respective Motions to Dismiss
and Motion to Strike. Defendants shall file their Reply Briefs on Tuesday, September 30, 2014.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

RT

20

____________________________________
SENIOR DISTRICT ERED
RD JUDGE
CHARLES O O
IS S R. BREYER
IT
harle
Judge C

ER

H

21
22

yer

s R. Bre

NO

19

Dated: Sept. 29, 2014

UNIT
ED

16

RT
U
O

S

15

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

R NIA

13

San Mateo, Debra LaPalm, Susan Loftus, Lisa Grote and Shawn Mason are hereby granted a one

FO

12

Pursuant to the Stipulation of the Parties and good cause showing, Defendants City of

LI

11

ORDER

A

10

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

23
24
25
26
27
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Case No. 14-cv-03741-CRB
EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY BRIEFS
2