Baranco v. Ford Motor Company et al

Filing 95

STIPULATION AND ORDER re #94 re Extending Time to Respond to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Class Action Complaint filed by Ford Motor Company. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/25/18. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2018)

1 DYKEMA GOSSETT LLC

Tamara A. Bush (197153)

2 [e-mail]

333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3100

3 Los Angeles, CA 90071

Telephone: [phone]
[phone]

4 Facsimile:

5 DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC

John M. Thomas (266842,)

6 David M. George – Pro Hac Vice

[e-mail]

7 [e-mail]

2723 South State Street, Suite 400

8 Ann Arbor, MI 48104

Telephone: [phone]
[phone]

9 Facsimile:

10 McAFEE & TAFT

Sherry A. Rozell, Pro Hac Vice

11 [e-mail]

Two W. Second Street, Suite 1100

12 Williams Center Tower II

Tulsa, OK 74103

13 Telephone: [phone]

Facsimile: [phone]

14

Attorneys for Defendant

15 FORD MOTOR COMPANY
16
17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
DAVID BARANCO, JAMES ABBITT,

Case No. 3:17-CV-03580-EMC

20 FARRELL, JOHN FURNO, JAMES

BROWN, DANIEL CARON, ANITA

Assigned to Hon. Edward M. Chen,
Courtroom 5 – San Francisco

21 MALISA NICOLAU, APRIL NICOLO,

CLASS ACTION

19 HARRIET ABRUSCATO, DONALD

JENKIN, GARY KUBBER and

individually and on behalf of all others
22 similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,

23
24

vs.

25 FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a

Delaware corporation;

26
27
28

Defendants.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO
RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’
SECOND AMENDED CLASS
ACTION COMPLAINT [L.R. 6-1(A)]
Complaint Filed:
1st Amend Complaint:
2nd Amend Complaint:
Trial Date:

June 21, 2017
August 18, 2017
April 11, 2018
None

1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND
TO PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT [L.R. 6 1(A)]
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-03580

Plaintiffs and Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY (“Ford”) (collectively

1

2 the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, on April 11, 2018, Plaintiffs’ filed a Second Amended Class

3

4 Action Complaint;

WHEREAS, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(3), Ford’s responsive pleading

5

6 is due on April 25, 2018;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that Ford may file its response to Plaintiffs’

7

8 Second Amended Complaint by May 9, 2018;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that if Ford files a partial motion to dismiss it

9

10 need not file an answer until after the Court enters an order granting or denying such
11 motion.

WHEREAS, counsel for Defendant, as the filer of this document, attests that

12

13 concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from each of the other
14 signatories:
15

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT:

16

1.

Ford’s response to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint is due by
May 9, 2018.

17
18 / / /
19 / / /
20 / / /
21 / / /
22 / / /
23 / / /
24 / / /
25 / / /
26 / / /
27 / / /
28

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND
TO PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT [L.R. 6 1(A)]
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-03580

1

2.

If Ford responds by filing a partial motion to dismiss, it need not file an

2

Answer to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint until after the Court

3

decides Ford’s motion.

4 Dated: April 25, 2018

DYKEMA GOSSETT LLC

5

By: /s/ Tamara A. Bush
David M. George (admitted pro hac vice)
John M. Thomas
Tamara A. Bush
Attorneys for Defendant
FORD MOTOR COMPANY

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Dated: April 25, 2018

MCCUNE WRIGHT AREVALO LLP
By:

/s/ Matthew D. Schelkopf
Matthew D. Schelkopf
Attorney for Plaintiffs

.

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

3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND
TO PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT [L.R. 6 1(A)]
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-03580

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER

2

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, the Stipulation is

3 GRANTED. The Court Orders that:
4

1.

Ford’s response to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint is due by

5 May 9, 2018.
6

2.

If Ford responds by filing a partial motion to dismiss, it need not file an

7 Answer to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint until after the Court decides
8 Ford’s motion.

11
4/25/18
12 DATED:________________

16

FO

LI

ER

A

H

15

RT

14

By: ________________________________
HON. EDWARD M. Chen
M. CHEN
Edward
UNITEDgSTATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Jud e
NO

13

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

R NIA

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT
ED

10

RT
U
O

S

9

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND
TO PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT [L.R. 6 1(A)]
CASE NO. 3:17-CV-03580