Lucido v. Nestle Purina Pet Care Company

Filing 104

STIPULATION AND ORDER Re MSJ schedule and page limits. Motion Hearing set for 10/27/2016 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Edward M. Chen. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/1/16. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/1/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

FRANK LUCIDO, et al, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiffs,
v.
NESTLÉ PURINA PETCARE COMPANY, a
Missouri corporation; and DOES 1 through 200,
inclusive,

16

Defendants.

Case No. 4:15-cv-00569-LB
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES:
1. SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
AND HEARING DATE FOR MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;
2. INCREASING PAGE LIMITS ON
BRIEFS IN CONNECTION WITH
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

17
(modified)

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND TO INCREASE
PAGE LIMITS
CASE NO. 4:15-CV-00569-LB
720962492.1

Having received and reviewed the stipulation of Plaintiffs Frank Lucido, Almaceo

1
2

Campbell, Laurae Campbell, Karen Phillips, Wayne Colello, Ricky Bisharat, Hope Benham,

3

Robin Benham, Virginia Burgardt, Cynthia Zenakis, Diane Porter, Lance Carlson, Grace

4

Armstrong, Thomas Normand, Sharon Normand, Christina Winters, Robert Bryden, America

5

Pena, Elizabeth Rodarte, and Kacy Kimball (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and defendant Nestlé

6

Purina Petcare Company (“Purina”), the Court rules as follows:

7

1. Purina shall file its motion for summary judgment by August 25, 2016;

8

2. Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to Purina’s motion for summary judgment by

9

September 22, 2016;

10

3. Purina’s reply shall be filed by October 13, 2016;

11

4. The motion shall be noticed for a October 27, 2016 hearing date, or on such other date

12

and time that is convenient for the Court and its calendar;
5. Purina’s brief in support of its motion for summary judgment and Plaintiffs’ brief in

13

32

14

support of its opposition to the motion for summary judgment shall not exceed 35 pages;
18

15

6. Purina’s reply brief shall not exceed 20 pages.

16

7. If necessary, the parties shall be entitled to make a separate request for additional

17

pages .

18
IT IS SO ORDERED.

S

23

RT

ER

H

25
26

EdwardM. Chen
rd M. Chen
ge Edwa S. District Court
Jud
Judge, U.
Northern District of California

FO

NO

24

R NIA

22

D
RDERE
S SO O IED
IT I
DIF
AS MO

LI

7/1
Dated: _____________, 2016

UNIT
ED

21

RT
U
O

20

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

A

19

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

27
1

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND TO INCREASE
PAGE LIMITS
CASE NO. 4:15-CV-00569-LB
720962492.1