Ross v. Octagon, Inc.

Filing 18

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 17 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 16 Renotice motion hearing filed by Andrew D Ross. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on November 20, 2014. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Charles M. Louderback, SBN 88788
Stacey L. Pratt, SBN 124892
Edward J. Donnelly, SBN 220980
LOUDERBACK LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2970
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiff
ANDREW ROSS

9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

ANDREW D. ROSS, an individual,
Case No.: 3:14-cv-04415 JST

13
Plaintiff,

14
15
16
17
18

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
ALTERING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

vs.
OCTAGON, INC., a Washington, D.C.
corporation,
Defendant.

Complaint Filed: 10/01/2014
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Plaintiff ANDREW D. ROSS (“Ross”) and Defendant OCTAGON, INC. (“Octagon”)
(each individually a “Party” and jointly referred to as “the Parties”), by and though their respective
counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
WHEREAS on October 28, 2014 Defendant Octagon, Inc. filed its Motion to Dismiss
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(1) Or To Transfer Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. § 1404(A) (Motion to
Dismiss”) [Dkt. 8] which set the date for Plaintiff’s opposition to the Motion to Dismiss on
November 12, 2014,

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ALTERING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION
TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION; CASE NO. 3:14-cv-04415 JST

1
2
3

WHEREAS on October 29, 2014, Plaintiff Ross filed a declination to proceed before
Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler [Dkt. 12],
WHEREAS on October 30, 2014, Court Clerk Richard W. Wieking issued an Order

4

[Dkt. 14] advising the parties that pursuant to the case’s reassignment to Judge Jon S. Tigar, “All

5

dates presently scheduled are vacated and motions should be re-noticed for hearing before the

6

judge to whom the case has been reassigned. Briefing schedules, including ADR and other

7

deadlines remain unchanged”,

8
9
10
11

WHEREAS on November 13, 2014, Defendant Octagon, Inc. filed its Re-Notice of
Motion and Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(1) Or To Transfer Pursuant To
28 U.S.C. § 1404(A), for hearing on December 18, 2014 [Dkt. 16],
WHEREAS upon receipt of Defendant’s re-notice of the Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiff

12

discovered that a clerical error had resulted in the original opposition date of November 12, 2014

13

being removed from the firm’s litigation calendar, along with the previously vacated December

14

18, 2014 hearing date,

15

WHEREAS no Party shall be prejudiced by this stipulation,

16

IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by the Parties that Plaintiff shall be granted an

17

extension of time to file his opposition to the Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff’s opposition shall be

18

filed on or before November 21, 2014. Defendant’s reply in support of the Motion to Dismiss

19

shall be filed on or before December 4, 2014.

.

20
21
22
23

DATED: November 17, 2014

LOUDERBACK LAW GROUP
By: /s/ Charles M. Louderback
Charles M. Louderback
Stacey L. Pratt
Edward J. Donnelly

24
25

Attorneys for Plaintiff
ANDREW D. ROSS

26
27
28

-2STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ALTERING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION
TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION; CASE NO. 3:14-cv-04415 JST

1

DATED: November 17, 2014

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.

2
By: /s/ Timothy L. Reed
Danielle Ochs
Timothy L. Reed
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415-442-4870

3
4
5
6
7
8

Attorneys for Defendant
OCTAGON, INC.

9
10
11

ORDER

12

21
22

n S.
J u d ge J o

ED

IT
Honorable Jon S. Tigar
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

ER

H

24

RDER
S SO O
I

RT

23

DATED: November 20, 2014

RT
U
O

20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

ISTRIC
ES D
TC
T
TA

NO

19

motion on or before December 4, 2014.

25

R NIA

18

the motion on or before November 21, 2014. Defendant shall file its reply in support of the

Ti ga r

FO

17

1404(A), the Court hereby GRANTS the extension of time. Plaintiff shall file his opposition to

LI

16

to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(1) Or To Transfer Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. §

A

15

of time for Plaintiff Andrew D. Ross to file an opposition to Defendant Octagon, Inc.’s Motion

S

14

Having considered the Stipulation regarding the parties’ agreement to allow an extension

UNIT
ED

13

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

26
27
28

-3STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ALTERING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION
TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION; CASE NO. 3:14-cv-04415 JST