Sharon Robinson v. Wells Fargo Advisors, et al

Filing 27

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 26 Stipulation For Revised Briefing Schedule on Defendant's Motions. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2016)

1
2

JAMES M. BRADEN (SBN 102397)
LAW OFFICES OF JAMES M. BRADEN
44 MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 1210
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104

3
4

TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: [phone]
EMAIL:
[e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Attorneys for Plaintiff Sharon Robinson
ROBERT TODD SULLWOLD (SBN 88139)
SULLWOLD & HUGHES
1999 HARRISON STREET, 18TH FLOOR
OAKLAND, CA 94612
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FACSIMILE: 415-762-5338
EMAIL: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Wells Fargo Advisors
and Wells Fargo & Company

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17

SHARON ROBINSON, an individual

Case No. 4:15-CV-05304-HSG

18
Plaintiff,

19
20

v.

21

WELLS FARGO ADVISORS, a Delaware
Limited Liability Company; WELLS FARGO
& COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; and
DOES 1-25 inclusive,

22
23
24
25
26

STIPULATION AND
ORDER REVISING
BRIEFING SCHEDULE CONSISTENT
WITH COURT’S CALENDARING OF
NEW HEARING DATE ON
DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO &
COMPANY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT OR FOR STAY PENDING
ARBITRATION

Defendants.
Date: June 30, 2016
Time: 2:00 PM
Courtroom: 15 on 18th Floor
Judge: Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

27
28

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
REVISING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1
2

(1) On April 28, 2016, Plaintiff Sharon Robinson (“Robinson”) and Defendant Wells

3

Fargo & Company (“Wells Fargo”) stipulated to a two-week continuance of the hearing on Wells

4

Fargo’s proposed Motion for Summary Judgment Or Motion for Stay Pending Arbitration, so

5

that it would occur on June 16, 2016 instead of on June 2, 2016, at 2:00 P.M. The Court,

6

however, did not have an opening on the calendar for June 16, and thus on its own motion

7

continued the hearing for two more weeks, to June 30, 2016, at 2:00 P.M.

8
9

(2) Robinson and Wells Fargo stipulated at the same time to a briefing schedule based
upon an assumed June 16 hearing date. In resetting the hearing to June 30, the Court said that

10

“the parties may brief the motion on the schedule set forth in the stipulation.” The Court’s

11

expression apparently was permissive rather than mandatory.

12

(3) But regardless of which, the parties believe that it is permissible and appropriate to

13

stipulate to, and ask the Court to agree to, a revised briefing schedule that is keyed to the June 30

14

hearing date, and that provides for the Court to have received full briefing by not less than 14

15

days before that date, consistent with Local Rule 7. Thus the parties wish to modify their

16

briefing schedule in a manner that is convenient for them and that will in no way prejudice the

17

Court’s ability to timely receive the full briefing.

18

(4) Accordingly, the parties stipulate that Wells Fargo shall file by not later than May 19,

19

2016 its Motion for Summary Judgment or its Motion for Stay Pending Arbitration, that

20

Robinson shall file by not later than June 9, 2016 her Opposition to such Motion(s), that Wells

21

Fargo shall file by not later than June 16, 2016 its Reply in support of such Motion(s), and that

22

hearing on the Motion(s) shall take place on June 30, 2016 at 2:00 P.M before Judge Gilliam.

23

(5) These new dates are agreed notwithstanding the specific time rule for Opposition

24

briefs set forth in Local Rule 7-2. The parties’ purpose is to provide Robinson one additional

25

week, above the Local Rule 7-2 requirement of two weeks (14) days, as appropriate in light of

26
27
28

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
REVISING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1

the substantially greater than one week continuance that Wells Fargo has obtained to file its

2

Motion(s).

3
4

(6) Robinson and Wells Fargo request that the Court confirm this Stipulation by making
it an Order of the Court, by signature on the next page.

5
6

Dated: April 29, 2016

7

LAW OFFICES OF JAMES M. BRADEN

8

By:_____/s/ James Braden___________________
James Braden

9

Attorney for Plaintiff Sharon Robinson

10

Dated: April 29, 2016

SULLWOLD & HUGHES

11
12

By: _____/s/_Robert Todd Sullwold______
Robert Todd Sullwold

13

Attorneys for Defendants Wells Fargo Advisors and
Wells Fargo & Company

14
15

ORDER

16
17
18

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING,
The foregoing Stipulation of the parties is hereby made an Order of this Court.

19
20
21

Dated: May 2, 2016

_______________________________
HON. HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
REVISING BRIEFING SCHEDULE