Shenwick v. Twitter, Inc. et al

Filing 279

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 277 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Requesting for Order Changing Time filed by Twitter, Inc. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on April 24, 2019. (wsnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/24/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

IN RE TWITTER, INC. SECURITIES
LITIGATION

8

ORDER RESETTING HEARING ON
MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM
NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER
OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

9
10
11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 16-cv-05314-JST

Re: ECF Nos. 270, 271, 277

12
13

Plaintiffs have filed a motion for relief from a non-dispositive pretrial order issued by

14

Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), 28 U.S.C.

15

§ 636(b)(1)(A), and Civil Local Rule 72-2. ECF No. 270.

16

The Court set the motion for hearing on May 23, 2019, with a response due by April 26,

17

2019, and any reply due by May 3, 2019. ECF No. 271. The parties have filed a stipulated

18

request to change the hearing date to May 16, 2019 due to availability of defense counsel. ECF

19

No. 277. The request is granted. The motion hearing is hereby reset for May 16, 2019 at 2:00

20

P.M. Defendants are ordered to file a response of no longer than 5 pages, not counting

21

declarations or exhibits, by April 26, 2019. Plaintiffs may file an optional reply of no longer than

22

3 pages by May 3, 2019.

23

Additionally, the parties, as well as non-party Gabriel Stricker, are hereby ordered to show

24

cause by no later than April 30, 2019 as to why Stricker should not be ordered to file on the public

25

record the declaration that was submitted to Judge Kim for in camera review pursuant to her order

26

at ECF No. 264. See ECF No. 266 at 1 (referencing this declaration in the order Plaintiffs now

27

challenge). If no party or third party objects to the public filing of that declaration, Stricker is

28

ordered to file the declaration by May 2, 2019. However, if any party does assert that the

1

declaration should not be filed publicly, the Court will take the matter under submission. The

2

Court is unlikely to read the declaration as part of deciding the motion for relief if the declaration

3

has not been filed publicly.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 24, 2019
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2