Brickman v. Facebook, Inc.

Filing 49

STIPULATION AND ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR FACEBOOK'S MOTION TO DISMISS re 47 Proposed Order filed by Colin R. Brickman. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 7/21/16. (tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Patrick J. Perotti (Pro Hac Vice) Frank A. Bartela (Pro Hac Vice) DWORKEN & BERNSTEIN CO., L.P.A. 60 South Park Place Painesville, Ohio 44077 Telephone: (440) 352-3391 Facsimile: (440) 352-3469 Email: pperotti@dworkenlaw.com fbartela@dworkenlaw.com Kristen Law Sagafi (SBN 222249) Martin D. Quiñones (SBN 293318) TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP 483 Ninth Street, Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 Tel.: (510) 254-6808 Fax: (202) 973-0950 ksagafi@tzlegal.com mquinones@tzlegal.com 14 Hassan A. Zavareei (SBN 181547) TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP 2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 808 Washington, DC 20036 Tel.: (202) 973-0900 Fax: (202) 973-0950 hzavareei@tzlegal.com 15 Attorneys for Plaintiff COLIN BRICKMAN 12 13 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 20 COLIN BRICKMAN, individually and as a representative of all others similarly situated, 21 22 23 24 Case No. 3:16-cv-00751 Plaintiff, PROPOSED ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR FACEBOOK’S MOTION TO DISMISS IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARTIES JOINT STIPULATION (ECF NO. 42) Defendant. The Honorable Thelton E. Henderson v. FACEBOOK, INC., 25 Date Action Filed: February 12, 2016 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. 3:16-cv-00751 1 1 2 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a), plaintiff Colin Brickman (“Plaintiff”) and defendant Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”), through their undersigned counsel, jointly stipulated as follows: 3 4 1. The parties stipulated to allow Plaintiff to file his First Amended Complaint no later 5 than July 8, 2016 (ECF No. 42). 6 2. The parties also jointly stipulated to the following briefing schedule for Facebook’s 7 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 42): 8 9 August 9, 2016: Deadline for Facebook’s Motion to Dismiss; 10 September 9, 2016: Deadline for Plaintiff’s Opposition; 11 October 10, 2016: Deadline for the United States to intervene and oppose any constitutional issue raised by Defendant’s motion to dismiss; and 12 October 24, 2016: Deadline for Facebook to file its response to both Plaintiff’s opposition and the United States’ intervention. 13 14 15 3. The parties also agreed that Facebook’s response to both Plaintiff’s opposition and the 16 United States’ intervention would be made in a single brief and Facebook shall have 17 25 pages to respond to both briefs (ECF No. 42). 18 Based on the parties’ joint stipulation (ECF No. 42), the Court finds that the Plaintiff’s 19 First Amended Complaint has been filed (ECF No. 43), and hereby orders that the briefing 20 deadlines for Facebook’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (ECF. No. 43) 21 are set as described above and that Facebook shall respond to both Plaintiff’s opposition and the 22 United States’ intervention in a single brief not to exceed 25 pages. 23 24 PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ JOINT STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: 7/21 , 2016 THE HONORABLE THELTON E. HENDERSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Case No. 3:16-cv-00751 1 1 Dated: July 21, 2016 DWORKEN & BERNSTEIN CO., L.P.A. 2 3 By: s/Frank A. Bartela Attorneys for Plaintiff COLIN BRICKMAN 4 5 6 Dated: July 21, 2016 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 7 8 By: s/Devin S. Anderson (with permission) Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC. 9 10 11 ECF ATTESTATION 12 I, Frank A. Bartela, am the ECF User whose ID and Password are being used to file this 13 document. I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the 14 signatory. 15 Dated: July 21, 2016 16 By: s/ Frank A. Bartela 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Case No. 3:16-cv-00751 2

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?