Sever, et al v. Icon Aircraft, Inc. et al

Filing 34

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 33 Second Revised Stipulation Re 26 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/21/2018)

Download PDF
1 Michael S. Danko (State Bar No. 111359 Claire Y. Choo (State Bar No. 252723) 2 DANKO MEREDITH, APC 333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 145 3 Redwood Shores, CA 94065 4 Tel: 650-453-3600 Fax: 650-394-8672 5 Email: mdanko@dankolaw.com 6 Stuart R. Fraenkel (State Bar No. 173991) Carlos F. Llinás Negret (State Bar No. 284746) 7 Nicole C. Andersen (State Bar No. 281218) 8 NELSON & FRAENKEL LLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3600 9 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Tel.: 213-622-6469 10 Fax: 213-622-6019 11 Email: stuart@nflawfirm.com 12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs ESRA SEVER, individually, and as parent and natural guardian of her minor children, A.S. and B.S.; ESRA SEVER, Personal Representative of the Estate Ahmet Cagri 13 Sever, deceased; A.S., a minor, individually and as Successor-in-Interest to the Estate of Ahmet Cagri Sever, deceased, by her Guardian ad Litem Esra Sever; and B.S., a minor, individually and 14 as Successor-in-Interest to the Estate of Ahmet Cagri Sever, deceased, by her Guardian ad Litem, 15 Esra Sever. 16 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 ESRA SEVER, individually, and as parent and CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-00584-HSG 19 natural guardian of her minor children, A.S. and B.S.; ESRA SEVER, Successor-in-Interest to, ORDER 20 and Personal Representative of the Estate of Filed: 1/26/2018 21 Ahmet Cagri Sever, deceased; A.S., a minor, individually and as Successor-in-Interest to the 22 Estate of Ahmet Cagri Sever, deceased, by her Guardian ad Litem Esra Sever; and B.S, a 23 minor, individually and as Successor-in-Interest to the Estate of Ahmet Cagri Sever, deceased, 24 by her Guardian ad Litem, Esra Sever. 25 Plaintiffs, 26 vs. 27 28 1 ORDER - 4:18-cv-00584-HSG 1 ICON AIRCRAFT, INC.; MATTHEW WOODRUFF, an individual; KURT PARKER, 2 an individual, EDWARD ELLIS KARKOW as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jon 3 Karkow (deceased); and DOES 1 through 12, 4 5 Defendants. 6 7 8 9 The Court, having considered the parties Revised Stipulated Request for Time to Conduct Jurisdictional Discovery, and for an Order Continuing the Deadline for Case Management 10 Statement, Case Management Conference, and Briefing Schedule and Hearing Date on Defendant 11 12 Icon Aircraft Inc.´s Motion to Dismiss, and for good cause appearing: 13 IT IS ORDERED: 14 1. The Plaintiffs shall be allowed to conduct jurisdictional discovery in the manner 15 and pursuant to the schedule set forth in the parties’ stipulation, through August 17, 2018. 16 17 2. The new deadline for Plaintiffs to file their response in opposition to ICON’s Motion shall be August 24, 2018. 18 3. If Plaintiffs seek to introduce extrinsic evidence or expert declarations from their 19 20 own expert(s) in support of their jurisdictional arguments, ICON may then take appropriate 21 written discovery of Plaintiffs and/or their experts and take depositions as necessary. Any such 22 discovery must be completed by September 24, 2018. 23 24 25 4. The new deadline for Defendant ICON to file its reply brief in support of its Motion shall be October 4, 2018. 5. The hearing on ICON’s Motion shall be continued until October 25, 2018. 6. The Initial Case Management Conference presently set for July 18, 2018, and all 26 27 28 associated deadlines, including the deadline for the parties to exchange initial disclosures pursuant 2 ORDER - 4:18-cv-00584-HSG 1 to the requirements of Rule 26(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, will be taken off 2 calendar pending resolution of ICON’s motion to dismiss. 3 4 DATED this 21st day of June, 2018. 5 6 ____________________________ Hon. Haywood S Gilliam, Jr. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 ORDER - 4:18-cv-00584-HSG

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?