Dames et al v. Facebook, Inc.
Filing
20
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting #18 Stipulation. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/8/2021)
1
2
3
4
KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
Jennifer L. Joost (Bar No. 296164)
One Sansome Street, Suite 1850
San Francisco, CA 94104
Tel: (415) 400-3000
Fax: (415) 400-3001
jjoost@ktmc.com
5
6
7
8
SONAL N. MEHTA (SBN 222086)
Sonal.Mehta@wilmerhale.com
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
2600 El Camino Real, Suite 400
Palo Alto, California 94306
Telephone: (650) 858-6000
Facsimile: (650) 858-6100
[Additional Counsel on Signature Page]
Counsel for Plaintiffs DEBORAH DAMES
and TIMOTHY MATHEWS, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated
9
10
DAVID Z. GRINGER (pro hac vice pending)
David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 663-6000
Facsimile: (202) 663-6363
11
Attorneys for Defendant
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
OAKLAND DIVISION
16
17
DEBORAH DAMES and TIMOTHY MATHEWS,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated,
18
19
20
21
22
Plaintiffs,
Case No. 4:20-cv-08817-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE
EXTENSION OF TIME
v.
FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware corporation
headquartered in California,
Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
Defendant.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 4:20-cv-08817-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME
1
2
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Deborah Dames and Timothy Mathews (“Plaintiffs”) filed the complaint in
this action (ECF No. 1) (the “Complaint”) on December 11, 2020;
3
4
WHEREAS, Defendant Facebook, Inc.’s (“Facebook”) response to the Complaint is currently due
January 19, 2021;
5
6
WHEREAS, six putative class action lawsuits have been filed against Facebook in this District in
recent weeks alleging violations of Section 2 of Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2;1
7
WHEREAS, five of these lawsuits, including this action, are currently the subject of contested
8
motions pending before Judge Freeman to consider whether the cases should be related to Reveal Chat
9
Holdco, LLC v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:20-cv-00393-BLF;
10
WHEREAS, two motions are currently pending before Judge Lucy H. Koh, including one motion
11
considering whether Klein v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:20-cv-08570-LHK, Kupcho v. Facebook, Inc., No.
12
4:20-cv-08815-JSW, Steinberg v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-09130-VC, and Dames v. Facebook, Inc.,
13
No. 3:20-cv-08817-HSG should be related, and another considering whether Klein v. Facebook, Inc., No.
14
5:20-cv-08570-LHK and Sherman v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-08721-JSW should be related.
15
ACCORDINGLY, pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1 and 7-12, Facebook and Plaintiffs, by and
16
through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that good cause exists to extend Facebook’s
17
time to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint until the earlier of: (a) March 5, 2021; or (b) the date
18
on which Facebook files a response to the complaints in Klein v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:20-cv-08570-LHK;
19
Sherman v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-08721-JSW; Kupcho v. Facebook, Inc., No. 4:20-cv-08815-JSW;
20
Steinberg v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-09130-VC; or Affilious, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc., No. 4:20-cv-
21
09217-KAW, or any other case that Facebook asserts is related to either Reveal Chat, Dames, or any of the
22
above matters.
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
In addition to this action, the actions include: Klein v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:20-cv-08570-LHK; Sherman
v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-08721-JSW; Kupcho v. Facebook, Inc., No. 4:20-cv-08815-JSW; Steinberg
v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-09130-VC; and Affilious, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc., No. 4:20-cv-09217-KAW.
Case No. 4:20-cv-08817-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME
1
Respectfully submitted,
2
Dated: January 7, 2021
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND
DORR LLP
3
By:
4
/s/ Sonal N. Mehta
SONAL N. MEHTA
5
Attorney for Defendant
Facebook, Inc.
6
7
8
Dated: January 7, 2021
9
10
11
12
13
14
/s/ Jennifer L. Joost
KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
Jennifer L. Joost (Bar No. 296164)
One Sansome Street, Suite 1850
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 400-3000
Facsimile: (415) 400-3001
jjoost@ktmc.com
22
Joseph H. Meltzer*
Terence S. Ziegler*
Melissa L. Troutner*
Lauren McGinley*
KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
Tel: (610) 667-7706
Fax: (610) 667-7056
jmeltzer@ktmc.com
tziegler@ktmc.com
mtroutner@ktmc.com
lmcginley@ktmc.com
23
*pro hac vice forthcoming
24
Counsel for Plaintiffs DEBORAH DAMES and
TIMOTHY MATHEWS and the putative Class
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
25
26
27
28
Case No. 4:20-cv-08817-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME
1
2
3
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
I am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to file the foregoing. Pursuant
to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i), I hereby attest that the other signatories have concurred in this filing.
4
5
6
Dated: January 7, 2021
By: /s/ Sonal N. Mehta
Sonal N. Mehta
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 4:20-cv-08817-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME
1
ORDER
2
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: Facebook’s time to answer or
3
otherwise respond to the Complaint is enlarged up to and including the earlier of: (a) March 5, 2021; or
4
(b) the date on which Facebook files a response to the complaints in Klein v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:20-cv-
5
08570-LHK; Sherman v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-08721-JSW; Kupcho v. Facebook, Inc., No. 4:20-
6
cv-08815-JSW; Steinberg v. Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-09130-VC; or Affilious, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc.,
7
No. 4:20-cv-09217-KAW, or any other case that Facebook asserts is related to either Reveal Chat, Dames,
8
or any of the above matters.
9
10
11
12
DATED: 1/8/2021
By: _________________________
Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
United States District Judge
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 4:20-cv-08817-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME
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?