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)

Download PDF
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?