Frazier v. Morgan Stanley & Co, LLC et al
Filing
29
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE re 25 Stipulation and Proposed Order. Case Management Conference set for 1/7/16 is hereby vacated. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 12/30/15. (jebS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/30/2015)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Sharon R. Vinick (SBN 129914)
Darci E. Burrell (SBN 180467)
LEVY VINICK BURRELL HYAMS LLP
180 Grand Avenue, Suite 1300
Oakland, California 94612
Direct: 510-318-7702
Main: 510-318-7700
Fax: 510-318-7701
sharon@levyvinick.com
Linda D. Friedman (pro hac vice forthcoming)
Suzanne E. Bish (pro hac vice forthcoming)
Jennifer S. Gilbert (admitted pro hac vice)
STOWELL & FRIEDMAN, LTD.
303 W. Madison St., Suite 2600
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Phone: 312-431-0888
Fax: 312-431-0228
Lfriedman@sfltd.com
11
Attorneys for Plaintiff
12
[additional counsel listed on next page]
13
14
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
OAKLAND DIVISION
18
19
KATHY FRAZIER, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated,
20
21
22
23
24
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. 3:15-CV-04512-PJH
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
vs.
[CIVIL L.R. 6-1, 6-2]
MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC,
MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY
LLC, AND MORGAN STANLEY,
Defendants.
25
26
27
28
CASE NO. 3:15-CV-04512-PJH
STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING CMC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
DARYL S. LANDY (State Bar No. 136288)
dlandy@morganlewis.com
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
600 Anton Blvd., Suite 1800
Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7653
Tel: 714.830.0600
Fax: 714.830.0700
MARK S. DICHTER, admitted Pro Hac Vice
mdichter@morganlewis.com
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
1701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Tel: 215.963.5000
Fax: 215.963.5001
BLAIR ROBINSON, pro hac vice pending (in Case No. 3:15-cv-04512)
blair.robinson@morganlewis.com
ANDREW SCHAFFRAN, pro hac vice pending (in Case No. 3:15-cv-04512)
aschaffran@morganlewis.com
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
101 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10178
Tel: 212.309.6000
Fax: 212.309.6001
Attorneys for Defendants
Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC,
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC, and
Morgan Stanley
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
CASE NO. 3:15-CV-04512-PJH
STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING CMC
1
Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2, Plaintiff Kathy Frazier (“Plaintiff”) and
2
Defendants Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC, and Morgan
3
Stanley (“Defendants”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of
4
record, stipulate to continue the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for January 7,
5
2016, to a date that is mutually convenient for the Court after Defendants’ have responded to the
6
Second Amended Complaint.
7
8
9
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2015, the Court set the Case Management Conference for
January 7, 2016 (Dkt. No. 8);
WHEREAS pursuant the Parties’ concurrently-filed stipulation, Defendants have
10
consented to Plaintiff filing a Second Amended Complaint for the limited purpose of adding
11
claims for relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
12
13
14
WHEREAS the Parties have stipulated that Defendants will have sixty (60) days after
filing to respond to the Second Amended Complaint;
WHEREAS the Parties believe that it would be beneficial to postpone the initial Case
15
Management Conference until after Defendants have responded to the Second Amended
16
Complaint
17
WHEREAS Plaintiff believes it would be particularly beneficial to postpone the initial
18
Case Management Conference in light of the pending motion to transfer to avoid burden to the
19
Court in the event it is granted;
20
THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED by the Parties and respectfully requested that the
21
Case Management Conference currently scheduled for January 7, 2016, be continued to a date
22
that is convenient for the Court after Defendants have responded to the Second Amended
23
Complaint. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-9 and this Court’s Standing Orders, the Parties
24
will submit a joint case management conference statement seven (7) court days prior to the
25
newly-scheduled conference.
26
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
27
28
2
CASE NO. 3:15-CV-04512-PJH
STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING CMC
1
2
Dated: December 21, 2015
LEVY VINICK BURRELL HYAMS LLP
By: /s/ Sharon Vinick
Sharon R. Vinick
Attorneys for Plaintiff
3
4
5
6
7
Dated: December 21, 2015
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
By: /s/ Daryl S. Landy
Daryl S. Landy
Attorneys for Defendants
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
CASE NO. 3:15-CV-04512-PJH
STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING CMC
1
2
3
4
ATTESTATION RE ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
I, Sharon R. Vinick, attest pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 5-1(i)(3) that all other
signatories to this document, on whose behalf this filing is submitted, concur in the filing’s
content and have authorized this filing. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
5
6
United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.
7
8
9
Dated: December 21, 2015
LEVY VINICK BURRELL HYAMS LLP
BY:
10
/s/ Sharon R. Vinick
Sharon R. Vinick
Attorneys for Plaintiff
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
CASE NO. 3:15-CV-04512-PJH
STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING CMC
[PROPOSED] ORDER
1
2
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, the Order setting the Case Management Conference for
January 7, 2016 is hereby vacated. The Court will set a new Case Management Conference for a
4
date after Defendants have responded to the Second Amended Complaint.
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNIT
ED
6
ERED
R NIA
_____________________________________
Hon. Phyllis J. Hamiltonilton
Ham
hyllis J.
Ju ge P
United States dDistrict Judge
H
ER
LI
RT
FO
NO
8
O ORD
IT IS S
9
A
DATED: ________________________
December 30, 2015
7
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
S
3
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
CASE NO. 3:15-CV-04512-PJH
STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING CMC
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?