Lalo v. Apple, Inc et al

Filing 104

Declaration of GAIL E. LEES IN SUPPORT OF 102 STIPULATED AGREEMENT FOR AN ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS FLURRY, INC. AND PINCH MEDIA, INC. TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO FIRST CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT filed by Flurry, Inc.. (Lees, Gail) (Filed on 5/18/2011) Modified on 5/20/2011 linking entry to document #102 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
[e-mail]
S. ASHLIE BERINGER, SBN 263977
[e-mail]
JOSHUA A. JESSEN, SBN 222831
[e-mail]
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 650.849.5333
Attorneys for Defendants
FLURRY, INC.

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN JOSE DIVISION

12

In re iPhone Application Litigation

CASE NO. 5:10-CV-05878 LHK (PSG)

13

17

DECLARATION OF GAIL E. LEES IN
SUPPORT OF STIPULATED
AGREEMENT FOR AN ORDER TO
EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS
FLURRY, INC. AND PINCH MEDIA, INC.
TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE
RESPOND TO FIRST CONSOLIDATED
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

18

The Honorable Lucy H. Koh

14
15
16

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

1
Declaration In Support of Stipulation to Extend Time – Case No. 5:10-CV-05878 LHK (PSG)

1

I, Gail E. Lees, declare as follows:

2

1.

I am an attorney licensed to practice law in all courts in the State of California and am

3

admitted to practice before the United States District Court, Northern District of California. I am a

4

partner in the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and am one of the attorneys responsible for

5

the representation of Defendants Flurry, Inc. (“Flurry”) and Pinch Media, Inc. (“Pinch Media”) in this

6

matter. I make this declaration of my own personal knowledge, unless the context indicates

7

otherwise, and, if called as a witness, I could and would testify competently to the facts stated below.

8
9
10
11

2.

On April 21, 2011, Plaintiffs Jonathan Lalo, Dustin Freeman, Anthony Chiu, Daniel

Rodimer and Jared Parsley (“Plaintiffs”) filed a First Consolidated Class Action Complaint
(“Complaint”) (ECF No. 71).
3.

The Court’s April 7, 2011 Order Regarding Case Schedule and Case Management

12

(ECF No. 66) provided that defendants would have 30 days from the filing of the Complaint to

13

respond to the Complaint.

14
15
16

4.

Flurry had previously appeared in this action, but on May 9, 2011, Plaintiffs served

Flurry with a Summons with the Complaint attached.
5.

I have been in discussions with Plaintiffs’ counsel, Scott Kamber, regarding whether

17

Plaintiffs have effected valid service of the Complaint upon Defendant Pinch Media, but I have

18

agreed to accept service of the Complaint on behalf of Pinch Media in the event Pinch Media has not

19

yet been validly served.

20

6.

Flurry is the parent corporation of Pinch Media, and in addition to the service issue

21

discussed above, I have been in discussions with Mr. Kamber regarding whether Flurry and Pinch

22

Media should be treated as separate entities or a single entity for purposes of this litigation.

23

7.

In light of our discussions, Mr. Kamber and I agreed, subject to the Court’s approval,

24

that it would be appropriate if both Flurry and Pinch Media had until June 13, 2011—the same date

25

certain other defendants will be responding to the Complaint—to respond to the Complaint.

26

8.

Neither Flurry nor Pinch Media has previously requested an extension of the deadline

27

to respond to the Complaint, and the requested extension will not alter the date of any other event or

28

any other deadline already fixed by Court order.

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

2
Declaration In Support of Stipulation to Extend Time – Case No. 5:10-CV-05878 LHK (PSG)

1

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the

2

foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on May 18, 2011, at New York,

3

New York.

4

DATED: May 18, 2011

/s/ Gail E. Lees
Gail E. Lees

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

3
Declaration In Support of Stipulation to Extend Time – Case No. 5:10-CV-05878 LHK (PSG)