Desoto Cab Company, Inc. v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 20

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANTS' DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND RELATED BRIEFING SCHEDULE by Hon. William Alsup granting 16 Stipulation. Motions due by 12/20/2016. Motion Hearing set for 2/23/2017 08:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William Alsup.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/29/2016)

1

5

Shannon Seibert, Bar No. 240317
[e-mail]
Joe Bautista, Bar No. 255708
[e-mail]
SEIBERT & BAUTISTA
22 Battery Street, Ste. 888
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.494.8115

6

Attorneys for Plaintiff

7

13

Kent M. Roger, Bar No. 095987
Brian C. Rocca, Bar No. 221576
Sujal J. Shah, Bar No. 215230
Minna Lo Naranjo, Bar No. 259005
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
One Market, Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, CA 94105-1596
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

14

Attorneys for Defendants

2
3
4

8
9
10
11
12

15
16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

19
20

DESOTO CAB COMPANY, INC. d/b/a
FLYWHEEL TAXI,

21
Plaintiff,
22
vs.
23
24
25
26
27

Case No. 3:16-cv-06385
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’
DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT AND RELATED
BRIEFING SCHEDULE

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware
corporation; UBER USA, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company; RASIER, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company; RASIERCA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants.

28
MORGAN, LEWIS &
BOCKIUS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Case No. 3:16-cv-06385
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
AND RELATED BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2, the parties hereby stipulate to an extension of the

2

deadline for Defendants to respond to the Complaint and for an enlargement of the related

3

briefing schedule.

4
5
6
7

RECITALS
WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed its Complaint in this action on November 2, 2016 (Dkt. 1) and
served Defendants on November 3, 2016;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), Defendants requested, and Plaintiff agreed, to

8

extend the deadline for Defendants to respond to the Complaint from November 25, 2016 to

9

December 23, 2016;

10

WHEREAS, Defendants intend to file a motion to dismiss the Complaint, and the parties

11

have conferred regarding an appropriate schedule for the briefing on that motion, in light of the

12

upcoming holidays and other scheduling matters;

13
14
15
16
17
18

WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 6-2(a), the parties jointly seek to extend the time
frames set forth in Local Rule 7-3 for the briefing on a motion;
WHEREAS, the parties have not previously sought an order extending time in this matter,
and the proposal will not alter the date of any other deadline already fixed by the Court;
THEREFORE, the parties, through their undersigned counsel, stipulate as follows, and
request that the Court enter an order setting the following deadlines:

19

1.

Defendants shall file their motion to dismiss on or before December 20, 2016.

20

2.

Plaintiff shall file its opposition on or before January 27, 2017.

21

3.

Defendants shall file their reply on or before February 10, 2017.

22

4.

The hearing on the motion to dismiss shall be noticed for the week of February 20,

23

2017 or February 27, 2017, or as soon thereafter as the Court’s schedule allows.

24

//

25

//

26

//

27

//

28

//

MORGAN, LEWIS &
BOCKIUS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1
Case No. 3:16-cv-06385
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
AND RELATED BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2
3

DATED: November 17, 2016

By: /s/ Brian C. Rocca
Brian C. Rocca1
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
Attorneys for Defendants

4
5
6
7

DATED: November 17, 2016

By: /s/ Shannon Seibert
Shannon Seibert
SEIBERT & BAUTISTA
Attorneys for Plaintiff

8
9
10
11
12

[PROPOSED] ORDER

13
14

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated: November ___, 2016
29
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

1

Brian C. Rocca, the filer of this document, hereby attests that he obtained the concurrence of the
other signatory, Shannon Seibert, prior to its filing.

28
MORGAN, LEWIS &
BOCKIUS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

2
Case No. 3:16-cv-06385
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
AND RELATED BRIEFING SCHEDULE