Brazil et al v. Dell Inc.

Filing 108

STIPULATION AND ORDER 107 to Continue Case Management Conference:Case Management Conference set for 1/9/2009 10:30 AM. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 11/6/08. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/6/2008)

Download PDF
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 Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857) Roger N. Heller (State Bar No. 215348) Allison S. Elgart (State Bar No. 241901) LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 30th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: (415) 956-1000 Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 Rachel J. Geman (NY Bar No. RG 0998) (Pro Hac Vice) LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 780 Third Avenue, 48th Floor New York, NY 10017-2024 Telephone: (212) 355-9500 Facsimile: (212) 355-9592 Daniel M. Hattis (State Bar No. 232141) Angelo Salvatore Parise (State Bar No. 165690) LAW OFFICES OF ANGELO SALVATORE PARISE 16870 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 400 San Diego, CA 92127 Telephone: (858) 674-6660 Facsimile: (858) 674-6661 Attorneys for Plaintiffs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA *E-FILED - 11/6/08* CHAD BRAZIL and STEVEN SEICK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. DELL INC. and Does 1-10, Defendant. Case No. C-07-01700 RMW STIPULATED REQUEST FOR FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND ORDER 788296.1 -1- STIPULATED REQUEST FOR FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE C-07-01700 RMW 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 788296.1 Pursuant to Local Rule 16-10(c), Plaintiffs Chad Brazil and Steven Seick ("Plaintiffs") request, with the consent of Defendant Dell Inc. ("Defendant"), that the Court vacate the current Case Management Conference set for November 7, 2008 and schedule a further Case Management Conference for 10:30 a.m., Friday, January 9, 2009. As grounds therefore, Plaintiffs state as follows: 1. On September 26, 2008, during a previous Case Management Conference, the Court scheduled a further Case Management Conference for November 7, 2008, as the parties were going to be appearing in Court that day anyway for a hearing on a motion to dismiss filed by Dell. The Court has since vacated the hearing on Dell's motion to dismiss, and both Plaintiffs and Dell agree that the CMC that was scheduled to be had along with the hearing on the motion to dismiss is not needed at this time. 2. Plaintiffs believe that the Court indicated its preference to hold a Case Management Conference subsequent to the hearing on Dell's motion to dismiss. In vacating the November 7, 2008, hearing on Dell's motion, the Court indicated that if it is to hold a hearing on the motion it will do so on or after December 5, 2008. Accordingly, Plaintiffs believe it is within the best interests for the fair adjudication of this matter for the Court to reschedule to the CMC that is currently scheduled for November 7, 2008 for some reasonable time after the Court anticipates holding a hearing on Dell's motion to dismiss. 3. Dell does not oppose Plaintiffs' request for a CMC. Therefore, Plaintiffs request, with the consent of Dell, that the Court vacate the current Case Management Conference set for November 7, 2008 and schedule a further Case Management Conference for 10:30 a.m., Friday, January 9, 2009. IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: November 4, 2008 By: LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN LLP /s/ Michael W. Sobol Michael W. Sobol Attorneys for Plaintiffs -2- STIPULATED REQUEST FOR FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE C-07-01700 RMW 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 Dated: November 4, 2008 By: FARELLA BRAUN & MARTEL LLP /s/ C. Brandon Wisoff C. Brandon Wisoff Attorneys for Defendant ORDER For good cause shown and pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 11/6 Dated: _____________, 2008 ____________________________ United States District Judge for Judge Whyte 788296.1 -3- STIPULATED REQUEST FOR FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE C-07-01700 RMW

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?