Gillard et al v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. et al

Filing 93

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 92 Stipulation Re Docket No. 91 . (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/3/2019)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Crystal Foley (SBN 224627)
SIMMONS HANLY CONROY
100 N. Sepulveda Boulevard, Suite 1350
Los Angeles, California 90245
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 310.322.3655
[e-mail]
Paul J. Hanly, Jr. (admitted pro hac vice)
Mitchell M. Breit (admitted pro hac vice)
SIMMONS HANLY CONROY
112 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.213.5949
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

10

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

11

Michael B. Gallub
E-mail: [e-mail]
Homer B. Ramsey
E-mail: [e-mail]
Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C.
125 Broad Street
New York, N.Y. 10004
Telephone [phone]; Facsimile [phone]
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Craig L. Winterman (Bar No. 75220)
E-mail: [e-mail]
Herzfeld & Rubin LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 900
Los Angeles CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]; Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

22
23
24

BRIAN GILLARD, MIKE MADANI, SHANT
BAKALIAN, ERIC WALLEY, and RICHARD
DEVICO, on behalf themselves and all others
similarly situated,

25
26
27
28

Plaintiffs,

Case No. 4:17-cv-07287-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
EXTEND
BRIEFING
SCHEDULE

vs.
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA,
INC., VOLKSWAGEN AG, and AUDI AG
Defendants.
STIPULATION AND ORDER
CASE NO. 4:17-cv-07287-HSG

1

Pursuant to L.R. 6-1(b), 6-2, and 7-12, Plaintiffs (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants (“Defendants”)

2

(collectively, the “Parties”) enter into this stipulation with reference to the following facts and recitals:

3

WHEREAS, on August 8, 2019 the Court entered an Order granting in part and denying in part

4

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint; ordering a Third Amended

5

Pleading to be filed on or before August 22, 2019; (Dkt. 84);

6
7

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) on August 19, 2019
(Dkt. 86);

8

WHEREAS, Defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss the TAC (“MTD”) on September 24,

9

2019 and the clerk’s docketing entry set a response date of October 7, 2019; replies due by October

10
11
12

15, 2019; and scheduled a hearing on the MTD for February 6,2020 (Dkt. 91);
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ counsel require a brief extension on their response to address the issues
raised in the MTD;

13

WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred and have jointly agreed, subject to the Court’s

14

approval, that Plaintiffs’ response to the MTD shall be filed on or before October 21, 2019; that

15

Defendants’ reply shall be filed on or before November 7, 2019; that the hearing date on the MTD

16

shall remain as docketed on February 6, 2020, based on the court’s publicized calendar, unless the

17

court wishes to re-schedule the hearing for an earlier date;

18

WHEREAS, the requested extensions will not affect any other schedules in the case;

19

Plaintiffs and Defendants stipulate and agree as follows and request the Court enter an Order

20
21
22

as follows:
1.

Plaintiffs’ response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint

shall be filed on or before October 21, 2019;

23

2.

Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ response shall be filed on or before November 7, 2019;

24

3.

Hearing on the Motion to Dismiss will be held on February 6, 2020 or on such earlier

25

date if the court so advises;

26
27
28

1

STIPULATION AND ORDER
CASE NO. 4:17-cv-07287-HSG

1
2

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: October 1, 2019

3

Respectfully submitted,

4
SIMMONS HANLY CONROY

5
6

By: ____/s/ Mitchell M. Breit_______________
MITCHELL M. BREIT

7

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

8

HERZFELD & RUBIN, P.C.

9
10

By: __/s/ Michael B. Gallub_________________
MICHAEL B. GALLUB

11

Attorneys for Defendants.

12
13
14
15

Dated: October 1, 2019
Pursuant to L.R. 5-1(i), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from
the other signatories.

16

By:

17

/s/ Mitchell M. Breit
Mitchell M. Breit

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

STIPULATION AND ORDER
CASE NO. 4:17-cv-07287-HSG

1

ORDER

2

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the Court hereby orders as follows:

3

1. Plaintiffs’ response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint

4

shall be filed on or before October 21, 2019;

5

2. Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ response shall be filed on or before November 7, 2019;

6

3. Hearing on the Motion to Dismiss and the Case Management Conference will be held on

7

February 6, 2020 or on such earlier date if the court so advises.

8
9
10
11

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 10/3/2019

__________________________________
Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3

STIPULATION AND ORDER
CASE NO. 4:17-cv-07287-HSG