Bergman v. Anderson et al

Filing 7

ORDER GRANTING re 3 Stipulation Extending Time for Defendants to Respond to 30 days after the filing of a consolidated complaint. The parties further agree that pursuant to rule LR 3-12(a) cases are related C06-4128 JF, C06-4454 JF, C06-4493 JW, C06-4510 JF, C06-4649 JF, and C06-4703 JF. AND REFERRING this Case to Judge Fogel Signed by Judge James Ware on 9/8/06. (sp, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2006) Modified text on 9/11/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF).

Bergman v. Anderson et al

Doc. 7

Case 5:06-cv-05374-JF

Document 7

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

GEORGE A. RILEY (State Bar No. 118304) LUANN L. SIMMONS (State Bar No. 203526) O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP Embarcadero Center West 275 Battery Street San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] [e-mail] DAVID M. FURBUSH (State Bar No. 83447) O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 2765 Sand Hill Road Menlo Park, California 94025 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] Attorneys for Nominal Defendant APPLE COMPUTER, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION KELLEY BERGMAN, derivatively on behalf of APPLE COMPUTER, INC., Plaintiff, v. FRED D. ANDERSON, WILLIAM V. CAMPBELL, TIMOTHY D. COOK, MILLARD DREXLER, STEVEN P. JOBS, RONALD B. JOHNSON, ARTHUR D. LEVINSON, MITCHELL MANDICH, PETER OPPENHEIMER, JONATHAN RUBINSTEIN, AVADIS TEVANIAN, JR., JEROME B. YORK, and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants, - and APPLE COMPUTER, INC., Nominal Defendant. Case No. C 06-05374 JW STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND REFERRING THIS CASE TO JUDGE JEREMY FOGEL

STIP. & PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. - C 06-05374 JW

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 5:06-cv-05374-JF

Document 7

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Kelley Bergman and Nominal Defendant Apple Computer, Inc., as follows: WHEREAS, Bergman filed his Complaint on August 31, 2006; WHEREAS, counsel are engaged in discussing the possibility of consolidation of this matter with related cases and/or the subsequent filing of a consolidated complaint; WHEREAS, the undersigned parties wish to further judicial efficiency by deferring responsive pleadings until such time as consolidation issues are addressed; WHEREAS, the undersigned parties believe and agree that pursuant to L.R. 3-12(a) the instant action is related to the following actions deemed related and currently assigned to Judge Jeremy Fogel: (1) Karant v. Jobs, et al., Case No. C06-04128 JF; (2) Holbert v. Anderson, et al., Case No. C06-04454 JF; (3) Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corporation Retiree Medical Benefits Trust v. Anderson, et al., Case No. C06-04493 JW; (4) Port Authority of Allegheny County Retirement and Disability Allowance Plan for Employees Represented by Local 85 of the Amalgamated Transit Union v. Jobs, et al., Case No. C06-04510 PJH; (5) Alecci v. Anderson, et al., Case No. C06-04649; and (6) Priebe v. Jobs, et al., Case No. C06-04703 WHA. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to L.R. 6-1, the undersigned parties stipulate as follows: All defendants who have been served to date, and all defendants who shall subsequently accept service and request to be covered by this stipulation, shall have an extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to 30 days after the filing of a consolidated complaint, or in the event that the Court denies a motion for consolidation, the above-described defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Bergman's Complaint no later than 30 days after such denial. The parties further agree that pursuant to L.R. 3-12(a), this case is related to the above-described cases assigned to Judge Jeremy Fogel, and therefore in the interest of judicial economy and efficiency, the parties respectfully request that this case be referred to Judge Jeremy Fogel.

STIP. & PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. - C 06-05374 JW

Case 5:06-cv-05374-JF

Document 7

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: September 5, 2006 GEORGE A. RILEY DAVID M. FURBUSH LUANN L. SIMMONS O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: /s/ Luann L. Simmons Luann L. Simmons Attorneys for Nominal Defendant APPLE COMPUTER, INC. Dated: September 5, 2006 JOSEPH W. COTCHETT BRUCE L. SIMON MARK C. MOLUMPHY KELLY L. SOMMERFELD COTCHETT, PITRE, SIMON & MCCARTHY

By: /s/ Mark C. Molumphy Mark C. Molumphy Attorneys for Plaintiff KELLEY BERGMAN CERTIFICATION OF CONCURRENCE I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Mark C. Molumphy. Dated: September 5, 2006 GEORGE A. RILEY DAVID M. FURBUSH LUANN L. SIMMONS O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: /s/ Luann L. Simmons Luann L. Simmons Attorneys for Nominal Defendant APPLE COMPUTER, INC.

-2STIP. & PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. - C 06-05374 JW

Case 5:06-cv-05374-JF

Document 7

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 4 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
MP1:987182.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 9/8/06 Dated: _________________________

______________________________________ The Honorable James Ware United States District Judge

-3STIP. & PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL. - C 06-05374 JW