Jackson v. Balanced Health Products, Inc. et al

Filing 71

ORDER re 64 granting STIPULATION to Extend Time for Defendants to Respond to Second Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 7/21/09. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/21/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Roger R. Myers (CA Bar No. 146164) roger.myers@hro.com Adam Brezine (CA Bar No. 220852) adam.brezine@hro.com HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP 560 Mission St., 25th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 415-268-2000 415-268-1999 (fax) Attorneys for Defendant VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION GRADY JACKSON and KELLEY ALEXANDER, in their representative capacity pursuant to Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§17203, 17535 and Cal. Code Civ. Pro.§§ 382, 1021.5, Plaintiffs, vs. BALANCED HEALTH PRODUCTS, INC., a Delaware Corporation, NIKKI HASKELL, an individual, GENERAL NUTRITION CORPORATION, a Pennsylvania Corporation, GENERAL NUTRITION CENTERS, INC., a Pennsylvania Corporation; GREAT EARTH COMPANIES INC., a Delaware Corporation; VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES, Inc. a New York Corporation; and, DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants. Case No. C 08-05584-CW STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiffs Grady Jackson and Kelley Alexander ("Plaintiffs") and Defendants Balanced Health Products, Inc. ("BHP"), Nikki Haskell, General Nutrition Corporation, General Nutrition Centers, Inc. (collectively, "GNC"), and Vitamin Shoppe Industries Inc. ("VS") (collectively, "Defendants"), through their respective counsel, as follows: 1. In its June 10, 2009 Order Granting In Part Defendants' Motions To Dismiss, 1 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER #45139 v1 saf C-08-05584-CW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the Court ordered Defendants BHP, GNC, and VS to answer Plaintiffs' complaint with respect to the first through fourth causes of action by July 10, 2009. 2. 3. On June 30, 2009, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint. On July 2, David Gernsbacher, counsel for Defendants BHP and Nikki Haskell, underwent surgery. 4. In light of Mr. Gernsbacher's surgery and the filing of the Second Amended Complaint, the Parties have stipulated and respectfully request that the Court extend the time for all Defendants to respond to the Second Amended Complaint by one week, to July 17, 2009. 5. The requested extension will not affect any other dates in this case. Dated: July 8, 2009 PINNACLE LAW GROUP, LLP By: /s/ Andrew August Andrew A. August Attorneys for Plaintiffs GRADY JACKSON and KELLEY ALEXANDER LAW OFFICES OF DAVID L. GERNSBACHER By: /s/ David Gernsbacher David Gernsbacher Attorney for Defendants BALANCED HEALTH PRODUCTS, INC. and NIKKI HASKELL HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP By: /s/ Roger Myers Roger R. Myers Adam Brezine Attorneys for Defendant VITAMIN SHOPPE INDUSTRIES INC. MCGUIRE WOODS LLP By: /s/ Sidney Kanazawa Sidney K. Kanazawa Attorneys for Defendants GENERAL NUTRITION CORPORATION and GENERAL NUTRITION CENTERS, INC. PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: United States District Judge 7/21/09 Dated: _______________ 2 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER #45139 v1 saf C-08-05584-CW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE IN FILING Pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, section 45 X(B), Roger Myers hereby attests that concurrence in the filing of this stipulation and proposed order has been obtained from Counsel for the non-filing parties. HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP By: /s/ Roger Myers Roger Myers Attorneys for Vitamin Shoppe Industries Inc. 3 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER #45139 v1 saf C-08-05584-CW

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?