Peter Schuman et al v. Microchip Technology Incorporated et al
Filing
83
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting #82 Stipulation to Consolidate Hearings. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/16/2018)
1
2
3
4
5
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C., SBN 00504800
Mark G. Kisicki (CA SBN 150057)
mark.kisicki@ogletreedeakins.com
Elizabeth M. Townsend (AZ SBN 024009) admitted pro hac vice
elizabeth.townsend@ogletreedeakins.com
2415 E. Camelback Road, Suite 800
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: 602.778.3700
Fax: 602.778.3750
6
7
8
9
10
Mark Schmidtke (IN SBN 1733-45), admitted pro hac vice
56 S. Washington Street, Suite 302
Valparaiso, IN 46383
Tel.: 219.242.8668
Fax: 219.242.8669
mark.schmidtke@ogletreedeakins.com
Attorneys for Defendants
11
*Counsel for Plaintiffs on the following page
12
13
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16
17 PETER SCHUMAN, an individual, and
WILLIAM COPLIN, an individual, on behalf of
18 themselves and on behalf of others similarly
situated,
19
Plaintiffs,
20
v.
21
MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY
22 INCORPORATED, a corporation; ATMEL
CORPORATION, a corporation; and ATMEL
23 CORPORATION U.S. SEVERANCE
GUARANTEE BENEFIT PROGRAM, an
24 employee benefit plan,
25
Defendants
Case No. 4:16-CV-05544-HSG
CLASS ACTION
STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER
TO CONSOLIDATE HEARINGS
[Civ. L.R. 6-2]
Hearing Date:
Time:
Courtroom:
Judge:
August 30, 2018
2:00 p.m.
2, Floor 4
Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam,
Jr.
Action Filed:
Trial Date:
September 29, 2016
None Set
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE HEARINGS
4:16-CV-05544-HSG
1
PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL:
2
Michael Rubin (SBN 80618)
Andrew Kushner (SBN 316035)
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
177 Post Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 421-7151
Facsimile: (415) 362-8064
mrubin@altber.com
akushner@altber.com
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Cliff Palefsky (SBN 77683)
Keith Ehrman (SBN 106985)
MCGUINN, HILLSMAN & PALEFSKY
535 Pacific Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94133
Telephone: (415) 421-9292
Facsimile: (415) 403-0202
cp@mhpsf.com
keith@mhpsf.com
William B. Reilly (SBN 177550)
LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM REILLY
86 Molino Avenue
Mill Valley, CA 94941
Telephone: (415) 225-6215
Facsimile: (415) 634-2897
Email: bill@williambreilly.com
17
18
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE HEARINGS
4:16-CV-05544-HSG
2
1
Plaintiffs Peter Schuman and William Coplin (collectively “Schuman Plaintiffs”) filed a
2 Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims on May 31, 2018. The deadline for Defendants Microchip
3 Technology Incorporated (“Microchip”), Atmel Corporation (“Atmel”) and Atmel Corporation
4 U.S. Severance Guarantee Benefit Program (“Severance Program” and, collectively with
5 Microchip and Atmel, “Defendants”) to respond to that motion is July 16, 2018. Plaintiffs’ reply in
6
support of the motion is due on July 23, 2018. A hearing on the Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims
7
is currently scheduled for August 30, 2018 at 2:00 p.m.
8
In the related case of Berman et al. v. Microchip Technology Incorporated et al., 4:17-cv-
9 01864-HSG, Plaintiffs Robin Berman, Bo Kang, Khashayar Mirfakhraei, Thang Van Vu, Donna
10
Viera-Castillo, Girish Ramesh, Patrick Hanley, Ilana Shternshain and Mandy Schwarz filed a
11
Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on July 2, 2018 and noticed the hearing for September 13,
12
2018 at 2:00 p.m. Plaintiffs in the Berman action are represented by the same attorneys who
13
represent the Schuman Plaintiffs. Defendants are the same in both actions.
14
In the interest of efficiency, the Schuman Plaintiffs and Defendants, by and through their
15 respective attorneys of record, request the Court consolidate the hearing on the Motion to Dismiss
16 Counterclaims filed in the Schuman case with the hearing on the Motion for Partial Summary
17 Judgment filed in the Berman case and hold a hearing on both motions on September 13, 2018 at
18 2:00 p.m.
19
20
21
22
23
24
Respectfully submitted July 13, 2018.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.
By: /s/ Mark G. Kisicki
Mark G. Kisicki
Elizabeth N. Townsend admitted pro hac vice
2415 East Camelback Road, Suite 800
Phoenix, Arizona 85016
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE HEARINGS
4:16-CV-05544-HSG
3
1
4
Mark Schmidtke (IN SBN 1733-45),
admitted pro hac vice
56 S. Washington Street, Suite 302
Valparaiso, IN 46383
Tel.: 219.242.8668
Fax: 219.242.8669
mark.schmidtke@ogletreedeakins.com
5
Attorneys for Defendants
2
3
6
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
7
By: s/ Michael Rubin (with permission)
Michael Rubin
Andrew Kushner
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
177 Post Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94108
8
9
10
11
Cliff Palefsky
Keith Ehrman
MCGUINN, HILLSMAN & PALEFSKY
535 Pacific Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94133
12
13
14
William B. Reilly
LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM REILLY
86 Molino Avenue
Mill Valley, CA 94941
15
16
17
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
18
19
20
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
21
22
23
24
25
In accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained from the signatories on this e-filed document, and that this attestation
was executed on July 13, 2018.
By: /s/ Mark G. Kisicki
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE HEARINGS
4:16-CV-05544-HSG
4
1
2
3
ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
The hearing on the Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims in Schuman et al. v. Microchip
4 Technology Incorporated et al., 4:16-CV-05544-HSG shall be consolidated with the hearing on the
5 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in Berman et al. v. Microchip Technology Incorporated et
6 al., 4:17-cv-01864-HSG. A consolidated hearing on both motions shall take place on September
7
13, 2018 beginning at 2:00 p.m.
8
9
10
Dated: ______________________
7/16/2018
____________________________________
The Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
United States District Judge
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE HEARINGS
4:16-CV-05544-HSG
5
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?