Richards v. Centripetal Networks, Inc. et al

Filing 43

ORDER (as modified) GRANTING 41 STIPULATION Regarding Anticipated Motions to Dismiss Complaint. Motions due by 6/24/2024; Responses due by 8/16/2024; Replies due by 9/10/2024; and Motion Hearing set for 9/19/2024 02:00 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 2, 4th Floor before Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 6/3/2024. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2024)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

18
19
20
21

ALBERT RICHARDS,
Plaintiff,

26

v.
CENTRIPETAL NETWORKS, INC.; ALSOP
LOUIE MANAGEMENT LLC; ALSOP LOUIE
CAPITAL 2, L.P.; ALSOP LOUIE PARTNERS
2, LLC; HOULIHAN LOKEY, INC.; OCEAN
TOMO LLC; STEVEN ROGERS; JONATHAN
ROGERS; PAUL BARKWORTH; GILMAN
LOUIE; JOSEPH ADDIEGO; WILLIAM
CROWELL; CRISTOBEL CONDE; and JOHN
DOES 1-10,

27

Defendants.

22
23
24
25

Case No.: 4:24-cv-01065-HSG
STIPULATION AND ORDER (AS
MODIFIED) REGARDING
ANTICIPATED MOTIONS TO DISMISS
COMPLAINT

28

STIP. CONCERNING MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Case No. 4:24-cv-01065-HSG

1

Plaintiff Albert Richards (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Centripetal Networks, Inc., Steven Rogers,

2 Jonathan Rogers, Ocean Tomo LLC, Alsop Louie Management LLC, Alsop Louie Capital 2 LP, Alsop
3 Louie Partners 2 LLC, Gilman Louie, Joseph Addiego, and William Crowell (collectively,
4 “Defendants”) stipulate as follows:
5

On May 28, 2024 this Court held a telephonic initial case management conference. The Court

6 directed the parties to meet and confer and submit a stipulation and proposed order to the Court
7 regarding the anticipated motions to dismiss. “The proposed order should cover the timing and structure
8 for consolidated motions to dismiss and subsequent consolidated briefing, as well as any proposed page
9 limits.” Dkt. No. 40.
10

The Parties have conferred and agreed upon the following:

11

 To the extent Defendants file more than one motion, Defendants shall coordinate any

12

response, and no brief in support shall repeat points made in any other Defendants’ briefs.

13

 Defendants shall be limited to 40 pages total for all motions to dismiss.

14

 Plaintiff shall be limited to 40 pages total for his opposition to all motions to dismiss.

15

 Defendants shall be limited to 20 pages total for all replies in further support of their

16

motions to dismiss, and no reply brief shall repeat points made in any other Defendants’

17

reply brief.

18

 Defendants shall file their motions to dismiss no later than June 24, 2024.

19

 Plaintiff shall file his oppositions or other responses no later than August 23, 2024.

20

 Defendants shall file their replies no later than September 23, 2024.

21

The proposed dates will not alter the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order.

22

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

23
24 Dated: June 3, 2024
25
26
27
28
1
STIP. CONCERNING MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Case No. 4:24-cv-01065-HSG

ORDER (AS MODIFIED) CONCERNING MOTIONS TO DISMISS

1

2 Having reviewed the parties’ stipulation, and good cause appearing therefor, the Court orders as
3 follows:
4

• To the extent Defendants file more than one motion, Defendants shall coordinate any

5

response, and no brief in support shall repeat points made in any other Defendants’ briefs.

6

• Defendants shall be limited to 40 pages total for all motions to dismiss.

7

• Plaintiff shall be limited to 40 pages total for his opposition to all motions to dismiss.

8

• Defendants shall be limited to 20 pages total for all replies in further support of their

9

motions to dismiss, and no reply brief shall repeat points made in any other Defendants’

10

reply brief.

11

• Defendants shall file their motions to dismiss no later than June 24, 2024.

12

• Plaintiff shall file his oppositions or other responses no later than August 16, 2024.

13

• Defendants shall file their replies no later than September 10, 2024.

14

• Motion to Dismiss Hearing shall be held September 19, 2024, 02:00 PM in Oakland,
Courtroom 2, 4th Floor.

15

16 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
17
18

Dated:

6/3/2024

19

__________________________________

20

Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
ORDER (AS MODIFIED) CONCERNING MOTIONS TO DISMISS Case No. 4:24-cv-01065-HSG