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)
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?