Greenwood v. Compucredit Corporation et al

Filing 238

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 237 Stipulation, filed by Ladelle Hatfield, Wanda Greenwood, Compucredit Corporation, Deborah McCleese. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte on April 7, 2010. (edllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/7/2010)

Download PDF
Case4:08-cv-04878-CW Document237-1 Filed04/06/10 Page1 of 3 1 MCGUIREWOODS LLP Susan L. Germaise (State Bar No. 176595) 2 1800 Century Park East, 8th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 3 Telephone: (310) 315-8200 4 Telecopier: (310) 315-8210 sgermaise@mcguirewoods.com 5 David L. Hartsell Pro Hac Vice 6 77 West Wacker Drive, Suite 4100 Chicago, IL 60601-1818 7 dhartsell@mcguirewoods.com 8 Attorneys for Defendant 9 COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION 10 11 12 WANDA GREENWOOD, LADELLE 13 HATFIELD and DEBORAH MCCLEESE, on behalf of themselves and others similarly 14 situated, 15 16 vs. Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 4:08-CV-4878-CW [Magistrate Elizabeth Laporte] [PROPOSED] ORDER ON STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER EXTENDING HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO TAKE SECOND 30(b)(6) DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 17 COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION; COLUMBUS BANK AND TRUST, jointly 18 and individually, 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 11064867.1 Defendants. Good cause appearing therefor, the Parties' April 6, 2010 Stipulated Request for Order Extending Hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave of Court to Take Second 30(b)(6) Deposition of Defendant CompuCredit Corporation is GRANTED and the following dates ordered: [Proposed] ORDER ON STIPULATION Case No.: 4:08-cv-4878 Case4:08-cv-04878-CW Document237-1 Filed04/06/10 Page2 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 a. Opposition Brief - From April 7, 2010 to April 13, 2010 Reply Brief - From April 14, 2010 to April 20, 2010 b. Hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Take Second 30(b)(6) Deposition of CompuCredit - From April 28, 2010 to May 4, 2010. at 9:00 a.m. IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 11064867.1 Dated: April 7, 2010 ____________________________________ The Honorable Magistrate Elizabeth Laporte 2 [Proposed] ORDER ON STIPULATION Case No.: 4:08-cv-4878 Case4:08-cv-04878-CW Document237-1 Filed04/06/10 Page3 of 3 1 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Susan L. Germaise, certify that on April 6, 2010, the foregoing PROPOSED ORDER 3 ON STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER EXTENDING HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' 4 MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO TAKE SECOND 30(b)(6) DEPOSITION OF 5 DEFENDANT COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION was filed electronically in the Court's ECF; 6 thereby upon completion the ECF system automatically generated a "Notice of Electronic Filing" 7 ("NEF") as service through CM/ECF to registered e-mail addresses of parties of record in the case, 8 in particular on the following: 9 Jay Edward Smith, Esq. js@gslaw.org 10 Christopher Joseph Nicholson 11 cnicholson@waadlaw.com 12 Kasie M. Braswell, Esq. 13 kasie@taylormartino.com 14 Steven Anthony Martino, Esq. stevemartino@taylormartino.com 15 16 Tim A. O'Brien, Esq. tobrien@mofo.com 17 U.W. Clemon, Esq. 18 uwclemon@waadlaw.com 19 Stephanie Nicole Johnson, Esq. 20 sjohnson@gslaw.org 21 On April 6, 2010, the following parties admitted pro hac vice, without registered NEF Adrian John Barnes, Esq. abarnes@gslaw.org Gregory Hascal Hawley ghawley@waadlaw.com Laurie Adrea Traktman, Esq. lat@gslaw.org William Lloyd Copeland, Esq. lloyd@taylormartino.com James R. McGuire, Esq. jmcguire@mofo.com David L. Hartsell, Esq. dhartsell@mcguirewoods.com 22 email addresses, were served a copy of the efiled document via First Class, Postage-Paid U.S. 23 Mail: 24 Richard R. Rosenthal, Esq. Law Offices of Richard R. Rosenthal, PC 25 200 Title Building 26 300 N. Richard Arrington Jr. Blvd. Birmingham, AL 35203 27 28 11064867.1 Rebecca G. Depalma, Esq. 2025 3rd Avenue North, Suite 500 Birmingham, AL 35203 /s/ Susan L. Germaise____________ Susan L. Germaise 3 [Proposed] ORDER ON STIPULATION Case No.: 4:08-cv-4878

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?