Glantz v. Lobel Financial Corp.

Filing 16

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 15 Stipulation TO CONTINUE LOBEL FINANCIAL CORP.S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT.(ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/11/2016)

1 SCOTT J. HYMAN (State Bar No. 148709)
[e-mail]
2 GENEVIEVE R. WALSER-JOLLY (State Bar No. 262784)
[e-mail]
3 SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
4 The Atrium
19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 700
5 Irvine, California 92612
Telephone: [phone]
6 Facsimile: [phone]
7 MARK D. LONERGAN (State Bar No. 143622)
[e-mail]
8 REBECCA S. SAELAO (State Bar No. 222731)
[e-mail]
9 SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
10 One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 94111
11 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
12
Attorneys for Defendant
13 LOBEL FINANCIAL CORP.
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA — SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
DANIEL GLANTZ, on Behalf of Himself and
17 all Others Similarly Situated,
18

Case No. 3:16-cv-00804-HSG

Plaintiff,
CLASS ACTION

19

vs.

20 LOBEL FINANCIAL CORP.,
21

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LOBEL
FINANCIAL CORP.’S DEADLINE TO
RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT

Defendant.
Action Filed:
Trial Date:

22

February 17, 2016
None Set

23
24
25
26
27
28
3:16-cv-00804-HSG
1
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LOBEL FINANCIAL CORP.’S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT

10431.0011/7248459.1

1

COMES NOW THE PARTIES TO THE ABOVE-REFERENCED ACTION AND

2 RECITE AND STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:
3

1.

WHEREAS, on February 22, 2016, Defendant Lobel Financial Corp. (“Lobel”)

4 was served with the Complaint (see Dkt. No. 7);
5

2.

WHEREAS, the Complaint alleges violations of the Telephone Consumer

6 Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. sections 227 et seq. in connection with calls allegedly placed
7 to Plaintiff DANIEL GLANTZ’s (“Plaintiff”) cellular telephone. The Complaint also alleges
8 violations of the TCPA on behalf of a putative class.
9

3.

WHEREAS, by prior stipulation and order, Lobel’s deadline to respond to the

10 Complaint is currently April 13, 2016;
11

4.

WHEREAS, the Parties are discussing early resolution options;

12

5.

WHEREAS, in light of the settlement discussions, the Parties agree that Lobel may

13 have through April 27, 2016 to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint; and
14

6.

WHEREAS, in the event that Lobel files a responsive motion, as opposed to an

15 answer, then the Parties stipulate and request that Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days to oppose
16 said motion (i.e. through and including May 27, 2016) and Lobel will subsequently have two (2)
17 weeks to file a reply brief (i.e. through and including June 10, 2016).
18

NOW THEREFORE THE PARTIES STIPULATE:

19

1.

That Lobel may have through April 27, 2016 to respond to the complaint; and

20

2.

In the event that Lobel files a responsive motion, as opposed to an answer, then the

21 Parties jointly stipulate and request that Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days to oppose said motion
22 (i.e. through and including May 27, 2016) and Lobel will subsequently have two (2) weeks to file
23 a reply brief (i.e. through and including June 10, 2016).
24
25
26
27
28
3:16-cv-00804-HSG
1
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LOBEL FINANCIAL CORP.’S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT

10431.0011/7248459.1

1 DATED: April 7, 2016

BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.

2
3
By:

4

/s/ L. Timothy Fisher
L. Timothy Fisher

5
Attorneys for Plaintiff DANIEL GLANTZ, on Behalf of
Himself and all Others Similarly Situated

6
7
8 DATED: April 7, 2016

SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation

9
10
By:

11

/s/ Rebecca S. Saelao
Rebecca S. Saelao

12
Attorneys for Defendant LOBEL FINANCIAL CORP.
13
14

ORDER

15

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, Lobel’s time to answer, move, or otherwise

16 respond to the complaint is extended through April 27, 2016. Further, in the event that Lobel files
17 a responsive motion, as opposed to an answer, then Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days to oppose
18 said motion (i.e. through and including May 27, 2016) and Lobel will subsequently have two (2)
19 weeks to file a reply brief (i.e. through and including June 10, 2016).
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21 DATED: April 11, 2016
22
23
Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

3:16-cv-00804-HSG
2
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LOBEL FINANCIAL CORP.’S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT

10431.0011/7248459.1