Till et al v. Saks Incorporated et al

Filing 29

STIPULATION AND ORDER. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 10/28/11. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2011)

Case4:11-cv-00504-SBA Document28

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

Filed10/14/11 Page1 of 2

H. Tim Hoffman (SBN 49141)
Arthur W. Lazear (SBN 83603)
Chad A. Saunders (SBN 257810)
HOFFMAN & LAZEAR
180 Grand Ave., Ste. 1550
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
DAWN TILL and MARY JOSEPHS
Jennifer B. Zargarof (SBN 204382)
[e-mail]
Geoffrey D. DeBoskey (SBN 211557)
[e-mail]
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
555 West Fifth Street, Suite 4000
Los Angeles, California 90013
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
SAKS INCORPORATED, SAKS & COMPANY and
SAKS FIFTH AVENUE, INC.

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17
18

DAWN TILL and MARY JOSEPHS,
individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Plaintiffs,
vs.
SAKS INCORPORATED, a Tennessee
corporation; SAKS FIFTH AVENUE, INC., a
Massachusetts corporation; SAKS &
COMPANY, a New York corporation; and
SAKS FIFTH AVENUE OFF FIFTH, ,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:11-cv-00504-SBA
Assigned to: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong
XXXXXXXXX
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DENY
CLASS CERTIFICATION AND REJECT
CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION

[Complaint filed: February 2, 2011]
[FAC filed: March 8, 2011]

26
27
28
LA1 2284769v.1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT’ MOTION TO DENY
CLASS CERTIFICATION AND REJECT CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION

Case4:11-cv-00504-SBA Document28

1

Filed10/14/11 Page2 of 2

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among Plaintiffs Dawn Till and

2

Mary Josephs (“Plaintiffs”) through their counsel, and Defendant Saks Incorporated, Saks &

3

Company, and Saks Fifth Avenue, Inc., (“Saks”) through their counsel, (collectively, the “Parties”)

4

to the following pursuant to Civil L.Rs. 6-2 and 7-12:

5

1.

On September 28, 2011 Saks filed its Motion to Deny Class Certification and Reject

6

Conditional Certification (the “Motion”). The hearing on the Motion was set by the Court for

7

February 28, 2012.

8

2.

The Parties have met and conferred, and have agreed to the following briefing

9

schedule for the Motion: Plaintiffs must file and serve any opposition papers to Saks’ Motion on or

10

before November 25, 2011 and Saks must file any reply papers on or before December 21, 2011.

11

This is the first request to modify the briefing schedule on Saks’ Motion.

12

4.

The Parties reserve the right to seek Court approval for further modification to the

13

briefing or to make other applications to the Court regarding the hearing date and/or briefing

14

schedule in connection with the Motion.

15

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

16

DATED: OCTOBER 12, 2011

HOFFMAN & LAZEAR

17
18

By: /s/Chad A. Saunders
Chad A. Saunders
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

19
20

DATED: OCTOBER 12, 2011

Sidley Austin LLP

21
22

By: /s/Jennifer B. Zargarof
Jennifer B. Zargarof
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

23
24
25

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

10/28/11
Dated: _______________

________________

27
Honorable Saundra Brown Armstrong
Judge of the United States District Court

28
LA1 2284769v.1

1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT’ MOTION TO DENY
CLASS CERTIFICATION AND REJECT CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION