Murray v. Sears, Roebuck and Co. et al

Filing 207

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken Denying 204 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/15/2013)

Case4:09-cv-05744-CW Document206-1 Filed02/14/13 Page1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

SQUIRE SANDERS (US) LLP
Mark C. Dosker (CA Bar # 114789)
[e-mail]
275 Battery Street, Suite 2600
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: +1.415.393.9887
Attorneys for Defendant
SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO.
(additional attorneys listed on signature page)
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
Svetlana M. Berman (CA Bar # 239445)
[e-mail]
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111-6538
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: +1.415.395.8095
Attorneys for Defendant
ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, INC.
(additional attorneys listed on signature page)

14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18
19
20

MARTIN MURRAY, individually, on
behalf of the General Public and on behalf
of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,

21
22
23
24
25

v.
SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO., a
corporation; ELECTROLUX HOME
PRODUCTS, INC., a corporation; DOES
1-100,

Case No. C-09-5744-CW
CLASS ACTION
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING
PLAINTIFF MURRAY’S MOTION FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF FOR
EXTENSION OF PAGES FOR CLASS
CERTIFICATION REPLY
Civil Local Rule 7-11

Defendants.

26
27
28
SQUIRE SANDERS (US) LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 94111

[Proposed] Order Denying Plaintiff Murray’s Motion for
Administrative Relief for Extension of Pages for Class
Certification Reply

Case No. CV-09-5744-CW

Case4:09-cv-05744-CW Document206-1 Filed02/14/13 Page2 of 2

1

The motion for administrative of relief (Dkt. 204) (the “Motion”) of Plaintiff Martin

2

Murray (“Plaintiff”), filed pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, seeking to extend the page length

3

limit applicable under the Local Rules to Plaintiff’s forthcoming Reply in support of the Motion

4

for Class Certification (Dkt. 167), came before the Court. Having considered the record and the

5

arguments of all parties’ counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Motion is DENIED.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

February 15
Dated: ____________________, 2013

Hon. Claudia Wilken
United States District Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SQUIRE SANDERS (US) LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 94111

[Proposed] Order Denying Plaintiff Murray’s Motion for
Administrative Relief for Extension of Pages for Class
Certification Reply

-1-

Case No. CV-09-5744-CW