Lalo v. Apple, Inc et al

Filing 118

STIPULATION re 71 Amended Complaint, JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR CERTAIN DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT by AdMarval, Inc, Mellenial Media. (Brown, Matthew) (Filed on 5/20/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

COOLEY LLP
MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127)
([e-mail])
MATTHEW D. BROWN (196972)
([e-mail])
101 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-5800
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Attorneys for Defendants
AdMarvel, Inc. and Millennial Media Inc.
KAMBERLAW, LLC
SCOTT A. KAMBER (pro hac vice)
([e-mail])
DAVID A. STAMPLEY (pro hac vice)
([e-mail])
100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor
New York, New York 10005
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

14

Interim Class Counsel

15

(Additional counsel listed on signature page)

16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18

SAN JOSE DIVISION

19
20
21
22

In re iPhone Application Litigation

Case No. 5:10-CV-5878-LHK
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
FOR CERTAIN DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND
TO COMPLAINT

23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
NO. 5:10-CV-5878 LHK

1

This Stipulation is entered into by and among plaintiffs Jonathan Lalo, Dustin Freeman,

2

Anthony Chiu, Daniel Rodimer, and Jared Parsley (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and defendants

3

AdMarvel, Inc. (“AdMarvel”), Millennial Media Inc. (“Millennial Media”), MobClix, Inc.

4

(“MobClix”), and Traffic Marketplace, Inc. (“Traffic Marketplace”) (AdMarvel, Millennial

5

Media, MobClix, Traffic Marketplace, and Plaintiffs collectively “the Parties”), by and through

6

their respective counsel.

7

WHEREAS on April 7, 2011, the Court entered an Order providing that Plaintiffs shall

8

file a Consolidated Complaint and Defendants shall answer, move, or otherwise respond within

9

30 days from the filing of the Complaint (Dkt. No. 66);

10
11

WHEREAS AdMarvel, Millennial Media, MobClix, and Traffic Marketplace were not
parties to this action on April 7, 2011, and therefore not subject to that Order;

12

WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed their First Consolidated Class Action Complaint

13

(“Complaint”) on April 21, 2011, naming AdMarvel, Millennial Media, MobClix, and Traffic

14

Marketplace for the first time as defendants (Dkt. No. 71);

15
16

WHEREAS summonses were issued as to AdMarvel, Millennial Media, and MobClix on
May 5, 2011, and issued as to Traffic Marketplace on or about May 5, 2011 (Dkt. No. 75);

17

WHEREAS AdMarvel, Millennial Media, and MobClix were served with the Complaint

18

on or about May 9, 2011 and Traffic Marketplace was served with the Complaint on May 11,

19

2011;

20

WHEREAS counsel for AdMarvel and Millennial Media filed notices of appearance on

21

May 13, 2011 (Dkt. Nos. 91, 92), counsel for MobClix filed a notice of appearance on May 17,

22

2011 (Dkt. No. 96), and counsel for Traffic Marketplace filed a notice of appearance on May 19,

23

2011;

24

WHEREAS the deadline under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for AdMarvel,

25

Millennial Media, and MobClix to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint is on

26

May 31, 2011, and the deadline for Traffic Marketplace to answer, move, or otherwise respond to

27

the Complaint is on June 1, 2011;

28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1.

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
NO. 5:10-CV-5878 LHK

1

WHEREAS under Civil Local Rule 6-1(a), parties may stipulate in writing, without a

2

Court order, to extend the time within which to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the

3

Complaint; AND

4

WHEREAS extending the date for AdMarvel, Millennial Media, MobClix, and Traffic

5

Marketplace to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint to June 13, 2011 will not

6

alter the date of any event or deadline fixed by Court order;

7

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

8

1.

9
10

AdMarvel’s deadline to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ First

Consolidated Class Action Complaint in the above captioned action is extended to and including
June 13, 2011.

11

2.

Millennial Media’s deadline to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the

12

Plaintiffs’ First Consolidated Class Action Complaint in the above captioned action is extended to

13

and including June 13, 2011.

14

3.

MobClix’s deadline to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Plaintiffs’ First

15

Consolidated Class Action Complaint in the above captioned action is extended to and including

16

June 13, 2011.

17

4.

Traffic Marketplace’s deadline to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the

18

Plaintiffs’ First Consolidated Class Action Complaint in the above captioned action is extended to

19

//

20

//

21

//

22

//

23

//

24

//

25

//

26

//

27

//

28

//

COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1220672/SF

2.

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
NO. 5:10-CV-5878 LHK

1
2
3

and including June 13, 2011.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: May 20, 2011

4

/s/ Matthew D. Brown
MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127)
([e-mail])
MATTHEW D. BROWN (196972)
([e-mail])
101 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-5800
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

5
6
7
8
9

Attorneys for Defendants
AdMarvel, Inc. and Millennial Media Inc.

10
11

COOLEY LLP

Dated: May 20, 2011

DLA PIPER LLP (US)

12

17

/s/ Carter W. Scott
LUANNE SACKS (120811)
([e-mail])
CARTER W. OTT (221660)
([e-mail])
555 Mission Street, Suite 2400
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

18

Attorneys for Defendant
MobClix, Inc.

13
14
15
16

19

Dated: May 20, 2011

K&L GATES LLP

20
/s/ Rachel R. Davidson
RACHEL R. DAVIDSON (215517)
([e-mail])
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

21
22
23
24

Attorneys for Defendant
Traffic Marketplace, Inc.

25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1220672/SF

3.

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
NO. 5:10-CV-5878 LHK

1

Dated: May 20, 2011

2

KAMBERLAW, LLP

7

/s/ Scott A. Kamber
SCOTT A. KAMBER (pro hac vice)
([e-mail])
DAVID A. STAMPLEY (pro hac vice)
([e-mail])
100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor
New York, New York 10005
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

8

Interim Class Counsel

3
4
5
6

9
10
11

FILER’S ATTESTATION

12
Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X (B) regarding signatures, I, Matthew D.
13
14
15

Brown, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.
Dated: May 20, 2011

COOLEY LLP

16
17
18

/s/ Matthew D. Brown
MATTHEW D. BROWN (196972)

19

Attorneys for Defendants
AdMarvel, Inc. and Millennial Media Inc.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1220672/SF

4.

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
NO. 5:10-CV-5878 LHK

1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

2
3

I hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I served the document(s) described below
in the manner(s) described below:

4

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR CERTAIN DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO

5

COMPLAINT

6



(By U.S. Mail) I am personally and readily familiar with the business practice of Cooley

7

LLP for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States

8

Postal Service, and I caused such envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid to be

9

placed in the United States Postal Service at San Francisco, California:

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Christopher Wolf
Hogan Lovells US LLP
Columbia Square
555 Thirteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004

Clayton .C. James
Hogan Lovells US LLP
One Tabor Center
1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 1500
Denver, CO 80204

Richard A. Lockridge
Lockridge Grindal Nauen, LLP
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401-2179
Dated May 20, 2011
/s/ Sandra Warren
Sandra Warren
COOLEY LLP
101 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1220672/SF

5.

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
NO. 5:10-CV-5878 LHK