McArdle v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al

Filing 93

ORDER re 92 Granting STIPULATION for continuance of class certification briefing schedule. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 03/18/2010. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2010)

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 MAYER BROWN LLP JOHN NADOLENCO (SBN 181128) jnadolenco@mayerbrown.com JOSEPH W. GOODMAN (SBN 230161) jgoodman@mayerbrown.com 350 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-1503 Telephone: (213) 229-9500 Facsimile: (213) 625-0248 MAYER BROWN LLP KEVIN RANLETT (admitted pro hac vice) kranlett@mayerbrown.com 1999 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 263-3000 Facsimile: (202) 263-3300 Attorneys for Defendants UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION STEVEN MCARDLE, an individual, on behalf of himself, the general public and those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AT&T MOBILITY LLC; NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS LLC; NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS SERVICES, INC., AND DOES 1 THROUGH 50, Defendants. Case No. CV-09-01117 (CW) STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE, ORDER Dept: Courtroom 2, 4th Floor Judge: Hon. Claudia Wilken STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE; [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. CV-09-01117 (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 Plaintiff Steven McArdle ("Plaintiff") and Defendants AT&T Mobility LLC, New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC, and New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc. ("Defendants") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS: 1. Pursuant to the Court's order of January 8, 2010, Plaintiff's motion for class certification is due on March 31, 2010, the opposition brief is due on April 28, 2010, the reply brief is due May 24, 2010, and the hearing is scheduled for June 10, 2010; and 2. For the convenience of the Defendants and the witnesses, depositions of Defendants' Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses on issues pertaining to questions of class certification have been scheduled for April 6-8, 2010, which is after the current due date for Plaintiff's motion for class certification; and 3. 4. The parties wish to complete this deposition prior to the filing of the motion; and The parties accordingly wish to continue the briefing deadlines related to class certification and have reached agreement on a briefing schedule that would accommodate such discovery and briefing, without changing the hearing date, NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES JOINTLY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: (1) (2) (3) (4) Plaintiff's opening brief shall be filed on or before April 27, 2010; Defendants' opposition brief shall be filed on or before May 14, 2010; and Plaintiff's reply brief shall be filed on or before May 27, 2010. The hearing on Class Certification shall remain on June 10, 2010. STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE; [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. CV-09-01117 (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 Dated: March 3, 2010 MAYER BROWN LLP By: __/s/ Kevin Ranlett________________ Kevin Ranlett JOHN NADOLENCO (SBN 181128) jnadolenco@mayerbrown.com JOSEPH W. GOODMAN (SBN 230161) jgoodman@mayerbrown.com 350 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-1503 Telephone: (213) 229-9500 Facsimile: (213) 625-0248 KEVIN RANLETT (admitted pro hac vice) kranlett@mayerbrown.com 1999 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 263-3000 Facsimile: (202) 263-3300 Attorneys for Defendants Dated: March 3, 2010 GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP By: __/s/ Adam Gutride________________ Adam J. Gutride ADAM J. GUTRIDE SETH A. SAFIER 835 Douglass Street San Francisco, CA 94114 Attorneys For Plaintiff IT IS SO ORDERED Dated: March 18, 2010 _________________________________ Hon. Claudia Wilken U.S. District Judge -2STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE; [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. CV-09-01117 (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?