Patrick et al v. Carrier IQ, Inc

Filing 13

STIPULATION AND ORDER Granting Request to Continue Time to Respond to Complaint at to Carrier IQ re 12 Stipulation. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 12/28/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

RODGER R. COLE (CSB No. 178865)
[e-mail]
MOLLY R. MELCHER (CSB No. 272950)
[e-mail]
FENWICK & WEST LLP
Silicon Valley Center
801 California Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
Telephone:
650.988.8500
Facsimile:
650.938.5200

6
7
8
9
10

TYLER G. NEWBY (CSB No. 205790)
[e-mail]
555 California Street, 12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
Carrier IQ, Inc.

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MOUNTAIN VIEW

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

SAN JOSE DIVISION

14
15
16
17

JENNIFER SUE PATRICK, an individual and
SCOTT LEWIS, an individual on Behalf of
Themselves and for the Benefit of All with the
Common or General Interest, Any Persons
Injured, and All Others Similarly Situated,

18
19
20

Plaintiffs,

Case No.: 11-CV-05842-EJD
STIPULATION RE CONTINUANCE
OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO
RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING
TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

v.

21

CARRIER IQ, INC., a Delaware corporation and
Does 1 to 100, inclusive,

22

Defendants.

23
24

WHEREAS the above-referenced plaintiffs filed the above-captioned case;

25

WHEREAS the above-referenced plaintiffs allege violations of the Federal Wiretap Act

26
27
28

and other laws by the defendants in this case;
WHEREAS over 50 other complaints have been filed to-date in federal district courts
throughout the United States by plaintiffs purporting to bring class actions on behalf of cellular
STIP RE CONTINUANCE OF TIME FOR
DEF. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

CV 11-05842-EJD

1

telephone and other device users on whose devices software made by defendant Carrier IQ, Inc. is

2

or has been embedded (collectively, including the above-captioned matter, the “CIQ cases”);

3

WHEREAS, a motion is pending before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to

4

transfer the CIQ cases to this jurisdiction for coordinated and consolidated pretrial proceedings

5

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1407, responses to the motion supporting coordination or

6

consolidation have been filed, and plaintiffs and defendants anticipate that additional responses

7

will be filed;
WHEREAS plaintiffs anticipate the possibility of one or more consolidated amended

8
9

complaints in the CIQ cases;
WHEREAS plaintiffs and defendant Carrier IQ have agreed that an orderly schedule for

10

MOUNTAIN VIEW

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

any response to the pleadings in the CIQ cases would be more efficient for the parties and for the

12
F ENWICK & W EST LLP

11

Court;

13

WHEREAS plaintiffs agree that the deadline for defendant Carrier IQ to answer, move, or

14

otherwise respond to their complaint shall be extended until the earliest of the following dates: (1)

15

forty-five days after the filing of a consolidated amended complaint in the CIQ cases; or (2) forty-

16

five days after plaintiffs provide written notice to defendants that plaintiffs do not intend to file a

17

consolidated amended complaint; or (3) as otherwise ordered by this Court or the MDL transferee

18

court; provided, however, that in the event that Carrier IQ should agree to an earlier response date

19

or if otherwise required to respond at an earlier date in any of these cases, Carrier IQ will respond

20

to the complaint in the above-captioned action on that earlier date;

21

WHEREAS plaintiffs further agree that this extension is available, without further

22

stipulation with counsel for plaintiffs, to all named defendants who notify plaintiffs in writing of

23

their intention to join this Stipulation;

24

WHEREAS this Stipulation does not constitute a waiver by Carrier IQ of any defense,

25

including but not limited to the defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction, subject matter

26

jurisdiction, improper venue, sufficiency of process or service of process;

27
28

WHEREAS, with respect to any defendant joining the Stipulation, this Stipulation does
not constitute a waiver of any defense, including but not limited to the defenses of lack of
STIP RE CONTINUANCE OF TIME FOR
DEF. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

2

CV 11-05842-EJD

1

personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, improper venue, sufficiency of process, or

2

service of process; and

3

WHEREAS, plaintiffs and defendant Carrier IQ, as well as any defendant joining this

4

Stipulation, agree that preservation of evidence in the CIQ cases is vital, that defendants have

5

received litigation hold letters, that they are complying with and will continue to comply with all

6

of their evidence preservation obligations under governing law, and that that the delay brought

7

about by this Stipulation should not result in the loss of any evidence,

8
9
10
11

Now, therefore, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12, plaintiffs in the above-referenced case
and defendant Carrier IQ, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as
follows:
1. The deadline for Carrier IQ to answer, move, or otherwise respond to plaintiffs’

MOUNTAIN VIEW

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

12

complaint shall be extended until the earliest of the following dates: forty-five days after the filing

13

of a consolidated amended complaint in these cases; or forty-five days after plaintiffs provide

14

written notice to defendant Carrier IQ that plaintiffs do not intend to file a Consolidated Amended

15

Complaint; or as otherwise ordered by this Court or the MDL transferee court; provided,

16

however, that in the event that Carrier IQ should agree to an earlier response date or if otherwise

17

required to respond at an earlier date in any of these cases, except by court order specifying a

18

different sequence of responsive pleading, Carrier IQ will respond to the complaint in the above-

19

captioned case on that earlier date.

20

2. This extension is available, without further stipulation with counsel for plaintiffs,

21

to all named defendants who notify plaintiffs in writing of their intention to join this Stipulation;

22

3. This Stipulation does not constitute a waiver by Carrier IQ or any other named

23

defendant joining the Stipulation of any defense, including but not limited to the defenses of lack

24

of personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, improper venue, sufficiency of process, or

25

service of process.

26

4. As a condition of entry into this Stipulation, defendant Carrier IQ and any other

27

defendant(s) joining this Stipulation, and the plaintiffs, agree that they are complying with and

28

will continue to comply with all evidentiary preservation obligations under governing law.
STIP RE CONTINUANCE OF TIME FOR
DEF. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

3

CV 11-05842-EJD

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2

DATED: December 23, 2011

ROTHKEN LAW FIRM

3
By /s/ Ira P. Rothken
Ira P. Rothken (160029)
[e-mail]
Jared R. Smith (130343)
[e-mail]
ROTHKEN LAW FIRM
3 Hamilton Landing, Suite 280
Novato, CA 94949
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

4
5
6
7
8
9

13

JOHN R. PARKER (257761)
[e-mail]
KERSHAW, CUTTER & RATINOFF, LLP
401 Watt Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95864
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

14

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

10
11

MOUNTAIN VIEW

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

12

15
FENWICK & WEST LLP

16

By /s/ Tyler G. Newby
TYLER G. NEWBY (CSB No. 205790)
555 California Street, 12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Ph: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

17
18
19
20
21

25

RODGER R. COLE (CSB No. 178865)
MOLLY R. MELCHER (CSB No. 272950)
FENWICK & WEST LLP
801 California Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
Ph: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

26

Attorneys for Defendant Carrier IQ, Inc.

22
23
24

27
28
STIP RE CONTINUANCE OF TIME FOR
DEF. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

4

CV 11-05842-EJD

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER
Pursuant to stipulation, it is SO ORDERED.

2
3
4

Dated:

December 28, 2011
Honorable Edward J. Davila
United States District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

MOUNTAIN VIEW

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP RE CONTINUANCE OF TIME FOR
DEF. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

5

CV 11-05842-EJD

1

CERTIFICATION

2

I, Tyler G. Newby, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being

3

used to file this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CONTINUANCE OF

4

TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT. In compliance with General

5

Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that Ira Rothken has concurred in this filing.

6
7

DATED: December 23, 2011

8
9
10

By /s/ Tyler G. Newby
TYLER G. NEWBY (CSB No. 205790)
FENWICK & WEST LLP
555 California Street, 12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Ph: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

11

MOUNTAIN VIEW

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP RE CONTINUANCE OF TIME FOR
DEF. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

6

CV 11-05842-EJD