McKinney v. Google, Inc. et al

Filing 119

STIPULATION to Extent the Deadline for Defendants to Reply in Support of the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Consolidated Amended Complaint by HTC Corp.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Rosemarie T. Ring, # 2 Proposed Order)(Ring, Rosemarie) (Filed on 11/11/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

GILLIAN L. WADE (SBN 229124)
SARA D. AVILA (SBN 263213)
MILSTEIN ADELMAN, LLP
2800 Donald Douglas Loop North
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail];
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Mary McKinney and
Nathan Nabors
HENRY WEISSMANN (SBN 132418)
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
355 South Grand Avenue, Thirty-Fifth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

STEVEN B.WEISBURD (No. 171490)
DECHERT LLP
300 West 6th Street, Suite 2010
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 512.394.3001
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant Google, Inc.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

MATTHEW L. LARRABEE (No. 97147)
DECHERT LLP
One Maritime Plaza, Suite 2300
San Francisco, California 94111-3513
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.262.4555
E-Mail: [e-mail]

15

ROSEMARIE T. RING (SBN 220769)
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
560 Mission Street, Twenty-Seventh Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2907
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]

16

Attorneys for Defendant HTC Corporation

17

[Additional Counsel on Signature Page]

13
14

18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
19
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
20
SAN JOSE DIVISION
21
22

In re Google Phone Litigation

CASE NO. 5:10-CV-01177-EJD
(Consolidated with No. 5:10-CV-03897 EJD)

23
STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE
DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANTS TO
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION
TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’
CONSOLIDATED AMENDED
COMPLAINT

24
25
26
27
28
12946794.1

STIPULATION
CASE NO. C 10-01177 EJD

1

WHEREAS, Defendants Google, Inc. and HTC Corporation (the “Defendants”)

2

filed a Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint in this action on October 24,

3

2011 (Docket No. 113);

4

WHEREAS, the hearing on the Motion to Dismiss is set for February 3, 2012;

5

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Mary McKinney and Nathan Nabors (the “Plaintiffs”) filed

6

an opposition to the Motion to Dismiss on November 7, 2011 (Docket No. 117);

7
8

WHEREAS, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(c), Defendants’ reply in support of
the Motion to Dismiss is due November 14, 2011;

9
10

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that Defendants’ deadline for filing the reply
should be extended until November 28, 2011, and;

11

WHEREAS, this agreed extension “involves papers required to be lodged or filed

12

with the Court,” and a court order is therefore required under Civil Local Rule 6-1(b) to extend

13

the deadline;

14
15

NOW THEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Defendants through their counsel of record
stipulate to the following:

16

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that, subject to Court approval, Defendants

17

Google, Inc. and HTC Corporation shall have until November 28, 2011, to file a reply in support

18

of the Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated Complaint (Docket No. 113). A proposed order is

19

attached, as is the declaration required by Rule 6-2.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12946794.1

1

STIPULATION
CASE NO. C 10-01177 EJD

1

DATED: November 11, 2011

MILSTEIN ADELMAN, LLP

2
3

By:

4

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MARY MCKINNEY AND NATHAN
NABORS

5
6
7

/s/ Sara Avila
SARA AVILA

DATED: November 11, 2011

DECHERT LLP

8
By:

9
10

Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE, INC.

11
12

/s/ Steven Weisburd
STEVEN WEISBURD

DATED: November 11, 2011

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

13
By:

14
15

Attorneys for Defendant
HTC CORPORATION

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

/s/ Rosemarie T. Ring
ROSEMARIE T. RING

Additional Counsel:
JOE R. WHATLEY, JR.
EDITH M. KALLAS
PATRICK J. SHEEHAN
WHATLEY DRAKE & KALLAS, LLC
380 Madison Avenue, 23rd Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]

HOWARD RUBINSTEIN
LAW OFFICE OF HOWARD RUBINSTEIN
914 Waters Avenue, Suite 20
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Mary McKinney and Nathan Nabors

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Mary McKinney and Nathan Nabors

25
26
27
28
12946794.1

2

STIPULATION
CASE NO. C 10-01177 EJD

1
2
3

BRIAN W. SMITH
SMITH & VANTURE, LLP
1615 Forum Place, Suite 4C
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]

ALAN M. MANSFIELD
THE CONSUMER LAW GROUP
10200 Willow Creek Road, Suite 160
San Diego, CA 92131
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]

4
5

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Mary McKinney and Nathan Nabors

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12946794.1

3

STIPULATION
CASE NO. C 10-01177 EJD

1

CERTIFICATION

2

I, Rosemarie T. Ring, am the ECF User whose identification and password are

3

being used to file this STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANTS TO

4

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED

5

AMENDED COMPLAINT. In compliance with General Order 45.X.B., I hereby attest that Sara

6

Avila and Steven Weisburd concurred in this filing.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12946794.1

4

STIPULATION
CASE NO. C 10-01177 EJD