In re Google Referrer Header Privacy Litigation
Filing
79
ORDER GRANTING #77 Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 8/25/2014. (Correction of #77 PDF) (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/25/2014)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
4
5
In re GOOGLE REFERRER HEADER PRIVACY
6 LITIGATION
7
8
_______________________________________
This Document Relates To: All Actions
9
10
11
12
13
Case No. 5:10-cv-04809-EJD
CLASS ACTION
[PROPOSED]
XXXXXXXX ORDER
GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE
OVERSIZED REPLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
OF MOTION FOR FINAL
APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION
SETTLEMENT AND AWARD OF
ATTORNEYS’ FEES, EXPENSES,
AND INCENTIVE AWARD
Hon. Edward J. Davila
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR EXCESS PAGES
CASE NO. 5:10-cv-04809-EJD
The Court has considered the Administrative Motion of Plaintiffs Gaos, Italiano, and
1
2 Priyev for an Order granting them leave to file a Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’
3 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees,
4 Expenses, and Incentive Awards in excess of fifteen (15) pages and the Parties’ stipulation for
5 such relief.
Good cause shown, the Court hereby ORDERS that Plaintiffs shall have leave to file a
6
7 memorandum in excess of fifteen (15) pages, and shall be permitted to file a Reply Memorandum
8 in Support of Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Motion for Award of
9 Attorneys’ Fees, Expenses, and Incentive Awards that is up to twenty-five (25) pages in length.
10 IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
12 Date:
________________________________
HONORABLE EDWARD J. DAVILA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
8/25/2014
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR EXCESS PAGES
1
CASE NO. 5:10-cv-04809-EJD
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?