Eidenmuller v. Groupon, Inc.

Filing 11

STIPULATION to Extend Time for Defendant to Answer or Otherwise Respond to the Complaint Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(A), filed by Groupon, Inc., William Eidenmuller. (Young, Christopher) (Filed on 4/18/2011) Modified on 4/19/2011 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

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

SHIRLI F. WEISS (Bar No. 079225)
CHRISTOPHER M. YOUNG (Bar No. 163319)
NOAH A. KATSELL (Bar No. 217090)
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
401 B Street, Suite 1700
San Diego, CA 92101-4297
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
PAUL J. HALL (Bar No. 66084)
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
555 Mission Street Suite 2400
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
GROUPON, INC.
.

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
17
18

WILLIAM EIDENMULLER, on Behalf of
Himself and All Other Similarly Situated
and the General Public,
Plaintiff,

19
v.

20
21

GROUPON, INC., a Delaware
Corporation,

CASE NO. CV 11-0984 (SBA)
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANT TO ANSWER OR
OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE
COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO LOCAL
RULE 6-1(A)
Judge: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong
Courtroom: 1

22
Defendants.

23
24
25
26
27
28
DLA P IPER LLP (US)
SAN FRANCISCO

EAST\44507931.2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
CASE NO. CV 11-0984 (SBA)

1
2

Plaintiff William Eidenmuller (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Groupon, Inc. (“Groupon”) by
and through their respective attorneys of record, stipulate as follows:

3

1.

4

Groupon.

5

2.

On or about March 11, 2011, Groupon was served with the Complaint.

6

3.

On or about March 11, 2011, plaintiffs in two other actions against Groupon1 filed

On or about March 2, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in this Court against

7

with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) a motion to consolidate this case,

8

along with eight other cases pending against Groupon and certain "retailer" defendants in various

9

district courts and involving similar allegations, in the Northern District of California (“MDL

10

Motion”).

11

4.

Defendants responded to the MDL Motion on April 4, 2011. Defendants agreed

12

that transfer and coordination or consolidation of the actions was appropriate, but proposed that

13

the appropriate transferee court is the Southern District of California.

14

5.

15

respond to the Complaint to May 2, 2011.

16

6.

The JPML will hear the MDL Motion on May 16, 2011.

17

7.

Extending Groupon’s response date until after the JPML panel rules on the MDL

On or about March 30, 2011, Plaintiff and Groupon stipulated to extend the time to

18

Motion will promote judicial economy, eliminate the potential for conflicting pretrial rulings, and

19

limit unnecessary party expenses and burdens. Barnes v. Equinox Group, Inc., No. C 10-03586

20

LB, 2010 WL 5479624, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 30, 2010) (granting stay pending the JPML’s

21

decision to transfer the case to “avoid unnecessary expenditure of time and resources [and]

22

potential duplication of efforts[.]”)

23

8.

For these reasons, the parties hereby stipulate and agree that Groupon’s time to

24

answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint shall be extended until (i) 45 days after the filing of

25

a Consolidated Amended Complaint or whatever other deadline is set by the transferee court, in

26

the event the JPML grants the MDL Motion, or (ii) 45 days after service of the JPML’s decision

27
1

28
DLA P IPER LLP (US)

Ferreira v. Groupon, Inc., No. 11-cv-0132-DMS(POR) (S.D. Cal. filed Jan. 21, 2011) and
Gosling v. Groupon, Inc., No. 11-cv-01038-CRB (N.D. Cal. filed Mar. 4. 2011).
-1-

SAN FRANCISCO

EAST\44507931.2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
CASE NO. CV 11-0984 (SBA)

1

on the MDL Motion to consolidate or whatever deadline is set by this Court, in the event the

2

JPML denies the MDL Motion to consolidate.

3

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

4
5

Dated: April 18, 2011
DLA PIPER LLP (US)

6
7

By /s Christopher M. Young
SHIRLI F. WEISS
PAUL J. HALL
CHRISTOPHER M. YOUNG
NOAH A. KATSELL
Attorneys for Defendant
GROUPON, INC.

8
9
10
11
12

Dated: April 18, 2011

13

BONNETT, FAIRBOURN, FRIEDMAN &
BALINT, P.C.
By

14
15
16

/s Andrew S. Friedman
ANDREW S. FRIEDMAN
ELAINE A. RYAN
PATRICIA N. SYVERSON
Attorneys for Plaintiff
WILLIAM EIDENMULLER

17
18

I, Christopher M. Young, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been

19

obtained from each of the signatories. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the

20

United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this 18 day of April,

21

2011 at San Diego, California.
By:

22
23

s/Christopher M. Young
CHRISTOPHER M. YOUNG
Attorney for Defendant Groupon, Inc.

24
25
26
27
28
-2-

DLA P IPER LLP (US)
SAN FRANCISCO

EAST\44507931.2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
CASE NO. CV 11-0984 (SBA)