Lenz v. Universal Music Group Inc. et al

Filing 388

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE (approving 387 ). Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 5/2/2012. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
KURT OPSAHL #191303
CORYNNE MCSHERRY #221504
JULIE SAMUELS (pro hac vice)
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

KELLY M. KLAUS (SBN 161091)
[e-mail]
L. ASHLEY AULL (SBN 257020)
[e-mail]
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
355 South Grand Avenue
Thirty-Fifth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

6

11

KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
Attorneys for Defendants
ASHOK RAMANI - #200020
MICHAEL S. KWUN -#198945
MELISSA J. MIKSCH - #249805
710 Sansome Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-1704
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

12

Attorneys for Plaintiff

7
8
9
10

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN JOSE DIVISION

16

STEPHANIE LENZ,

17
18
19
20
21

Case No. C 07-03783-JF
Plaintiff,

v.
UNIVERSAL MUSIC CORP., UNIVERSAL
MUSIC PUBLISHING, INC., and
UNIVERSAL MUSIC PUBLISHING
GROUP,

JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE CASE
MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
Judge:

The Hon. Jeremy Fogel

Defendants.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 07-03783-JF
17097772.1

1

Plaintiff Stephanie Lenz (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Universal Music Corp., Universal

2

Music Publishing, Inc. and Universal Musical Publishing Group (“Universal”), by and through

3

their respective counsel of record, hereby declare and stipulate as follows:

4
5
6

WHEREAS, the parties previously filed opening motions for summary judgment on
October 18, 2010;
WHEREAS, the Court on September 22, 2011 administratively terminated the cross-

7

motions for summary judgment pending the determination of the then-pending Motion for

8

Contempt before Magistrate Judge Lloyd;

9
10
11

WHEREAS, Magistrate Judge Lloyd on March 1, 2012 issued his Order granting in part
and denying in part the Motion for Contempt;
WHEREAS, the Parties had previously agreed to defer the further deposition of Plaintiff,

12

ordered by Magistrate Judge Trumbull in the Order of October 22, 2010, pending Magistrate

13

Judge Lloyd’s ruling;

14

WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred, have reached an agreement as to an

15

orderly schedule for the supplemental deposition of Plaintiff and the re-filing and further briefing

16

of respective motions for summary judgment, and have cleared with Chambers the Court’s

17

availability to hear the summary judgment motions;

18

ACCORDINGLY, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:

19

[1] Defendants shall take the deposition of Plaintiff in accordance with Magistrate Judge

20

Trumbull’s October 22, 2010 Order at the offices of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP in

21

San Francisco, on Thursday, June 28, 2012, at 10 a.m.

22

[2] The Parties shall file any motions for summary judgment by Friday, July 13, 2012.

23

[3] The Parties shall file any oppositions to motions for summary judgment by Friday,

24
25

August 24, 2012.
[4] The Parties shall file any replies in support of motions for summary judgment by

26

Wednesday, September 26, 2012.

27
28
1
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 07-03783-JF
17097772.1

1

[5] The Parties shall appear before the Court for a hearing regarding any motions for

2
3

summary judgment on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
IN SUPPORT OF SAID STIPULATION,

4

a) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a)(1), the parties state that the time

5

modifications set forth above are requested for the purpose of setting an orderly

6

schedule for resolution of Plaintiff’s Motion for Relief and their respective

7

motions for summary judgment;

8

b) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a)(2), the parties disclose the following previous

9

time modifications in this case:

10

(1)

11

August 20, 2007 (Docket No. 8), time to respond to first amended
complaint;

12

(2)

13

October 11, 2007 (Docket No. 19), briefing schedule on Universal’s motion
to dismiss and special motion to strike;

14

(3)

15

November 16, 2007 (Docket No. 26), briefing schedule on Universal’s
motion to dismiss and special motion to strike;

16

(4)

17

April 30, 2008 (Docket No. 35), time to respond to second amended
complaint;

18

(5)

August 29, 2008 (Docket No. 46), time to respond to second amended

19

complaint and briefing schedule for motion for to certify for interlocutory

20

appeal;

21

(6)

22

April 15, 2009 (Docket No. 63), briefing schedule for motion for protective
order;

23

(7)

24

September 9, 2009 (Docket No. 166), briefing schedule for administrative
motion;

25

(8)

26

September 14, 2009 (Docket No. 176), modifications to case management
schedule;

27

(9)

November 3, 2009 (Docket No. 206), briefing schedule on Plaintiff’s

28
2
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 07-03783-JF
17097772.1

1

motion for summary judgment on certain of Universal’s affirmative

2

defenses; and

3

(10) July 16, 2010 (Docket No. 291), modifications to case management

4

schedule;

5

(11) November 4, 2010 (Docket No. 349), modifications to case management

6

schedule;

7

(12) March 11, 2011 (Docket No. 381), modifications to case management

8

schedule.

9

c) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2(a)(3), the parties state that the requested time

10

modifications will not affect any dates currently scheduled.

11
12

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated:

April 10, 2012

ELECTRONIC FRONTIER
FOUNDATION

13
14

By: __/s/ Julie Samuels*____
JULIE SAMUELS
Attorneys for Plaintiff
STEPHANIE LENZ

15
16
17

Dated:

April 10 , 2012

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

18
19

By: __/s/ Kelly M. Klaus_____
KELLY M. KLAUS
Attorneys for Defendants
UNIVERSAL MUSIC CORP.,
UNIVERSAL MUSIC PUBLISHING,
INC. and UNIVERSAL MUSIC
PUBLISHING GROUP

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

*

Electronically signed by Defendants’ counsel with the concurrence of Plaintiff’s counsel. N.D.
Cal. G.O. 45 ¶ X.B.
3
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 07-03783-JF

17097772.1

1

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

2
3

Dated:

4

By: __________________________________
HON. JEREMY FOGEL
United States District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 07-03783-JF
17097772.1