Woods v. Google, Inc.
Filing
71
STIPULATION AND ORDER Granting Request to Enlarge Time to file Response re 70 Order. Response due 10/8/2011. If Defendant's response to the Amended Complaint is not an answer, but rather a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12, then (i) Plai ntiff's opposition to that motion shall be filed no later than November 9, 2011; and (ii) Defendant's reply shall be filed no later than November 18, 2011. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 10/6/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/6/2011)
S
7
8
ER
R NIA
FO
. D av i l a
LI
J
w a rd J
u d ge E d
H
6
RT
5
NO
4
ERED
O ORD
IT IS S
A
3
UNIT
ED
2
MAYER BROWN LLP
Edward D. Johnson (SBN 189475)
wjohnson@mayerbrown.com
John M. Neukom (SBN 275887)
jneukom@mayerbrown.com
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112
Telephone: (650) 331-2000
Facsimile: (650) 331-2060
RT
U
O
1
ISTRIC
ES D
TC
T
TA
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc.
C
10/6/2011
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN JOSE DIVISION
12
13
RICK WOODS, Individually and On Behalf
of Others Similarly Situated,
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-01263-EJD
14
Plaintiff,
STIPULATION ENLARGING TIME
PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-1(a)
15
v.
Honorable Edward J. Davila
16
17
18
Complaint filed: March 15, 2011
GOOGLE INC.,
Defendant.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION ENLARGING TIME
5:11-CV-01263-EJD
1
Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Civil Local Rule 6-1(a), the named parties hereby stipulate that
2
3
Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Docket No. 68) shall be filed no later
4
than October 8, 2011.
5
If Defendant’s response to the Amended Complaint is not an answer, but rather a motion
6
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12, then (i) Plaintiff’s opposition to that motion shall be filed no later
7
than November 9, 2011; and (ii) Defendant’s reply shall be filed no later than November 18,
8
2011.
9
10
Date: September 19, 2011
_/s John M. Neukom_________
John M. Neukom
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
MAYER BROWN LLP
Attorneys for Defendant Google, Inc.
Date: September 19, 2011
NIX, PATTERSON & ROACH LLP
_/s Brad E. Seidel___________
Brad E. Seidel
Attorneys for Plaintiff Rick Woods
Filer’s Attestation: In compliance with General Order 45(X)(B), I hereby attest that concurrence
in the filing of this Stipulation has been obtained from counsel for Plaintiff, Brad E. Seidel.
_/s John M. Neukom_________
John M. Neukom
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1-
STIPULATION ENLARGING TIME
5:11-CV-01263-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?