Sager v. Bank of America Corporation et al

Filing 32

STIPULATION AND ORDER 30 Regarding Briefing Schedule for Defendant Bank of America Corporation's and Defendant Soundbite Communications, Inc.'s Motions to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 6/28/12. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/28/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Abraham J. Colman (SBN 146933)
[e-mail]
Felicia Y. Yu (SBN 193316)
[e-mail]
Michael A. Garabed (SBN 223511)
[e-mail]
Janet M. Lee (SBN 251518)
[e-mail]
REED SMITH LLP
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1514
Telephone:
213.457.8000
Facsimile:
213.457.8080
Attorneys for Defendant
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION

REED SMITH LLP

A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

RON SAGER, individually and on behalf of a
class of similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, a
Delaware corporation, SOUNDBITE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware
corporation,

STIPULATION AND []
ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT BANK OF
AMERICA CORPORATION’S AND
DEFENDANT SOUNDBITE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.’S MOTIONS
TO STAY CASE
CLASS ACTION

21

Date:
Time:
Courtroom:

22

Complaint Filed: January 11, 2012

23

The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte

20

Defendants.

Case No. 5:12-cv-00197-RMW

September 14, 2012
9:00 a.m.
6 (4th Floor)

24
25
26
27
28
–1–

Case No. 5:12-cv-00197-RMW

STIPULATION AND [] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS TO STAY

1

Plaintiff Ron Sager (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Bank of America Corporation (“Bank of

2

America”) and SoundBite Communications, Inc. (“SoundBite”) (Bank of America and SoundBite

3

are collectively, “Defendants”), pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1, 6-2, and 7-12, hereby stipulate as

4

follows:

5

WHEREAS, on June 21, 2012, Defendants filed Motions to Stay this action (“Motions to

6

Stay”) pursuant to the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, as issues central to the determination of this

7

action are pending before the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”);

8

WHEREAS, Plaintiff will oppose the Motions to Stay;

9

WHEREAS, Defendants will file replies in support of their respective Motions to Stay;

REED SMITH LLP

A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware

10

WHEREAS, Local Rule 7-3 provides, in pertinent part, that any opposition to the Motions to

11

Stay must be served and filed not more than fourteen (14) days after the Motions to Stay are served

12

and filed and any reply must be served and filed not more than seven (7) days after the opposition is

13

served and filed,

14

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree to extend Plaintiff’s time to file

15

any oppositions to the Motions to Stay to thirty (30) days after the Motions to Stay are filed (which

16

is July 23, 2012) and agree to extend Defendants’ time to file any replies in support of their

17

respective Motions to Stay to sixteen (16) days after the respective oppositions to the Motions to

18

Stay are filed (which is August 8, 2012, assuming that Plaintiff files the oppositions on July 23,

19

2012). Should the Court enter an order denying this stipulation or not enter an order on this

20

stipulation prior to the deadlines for the opposition and reply per Local Rule 7-3, the Parties agree

21

that Plaintiff shall not waive any rights or arguments by waiting to file and serve any opposition to

22

the Motions to Stay until fourteen (14) days after the Court enters an order ruling on this stipulation,

23

and that Defendants shall not waive any rights or arguments by waiting to file and serve any replies

24

in support of the Motions to Stay until seven (7) days after Plaintiff files the respective oppositions.

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: June 22, 2012

EDELSON MCGUIRE, LLP
By

/s/ Sean P. Reis
Case No. 5:12-cv-00197-RMW
–2–

STIPULATION AND [] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS TO STAY

1

Sean P. Reis
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RON SAGER

2
3

DATED: June 22, 2012

COOLEY LLP

4
By

5
6

/s/ Mazda K. Anita
Mazda K. Antia
Attorneys for Defendant
SOUNDBITE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

7
8

DATED: June 21, 2012

REED SMITH LLP

9

By

REED SMITH LLP

A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware

10
11
12

/s/ Janet M. Lee
Abraham J. Colman
Felicia Y. Yu
Michael A. Garabed
Janet M. Lee
Attorneys for Defendant
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION

13
14
15
16

I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this stipulation has been obtained from each
of the other signatories.
DATED: June 21, 2012

REED SMITH LLP

17

By

18
19
20

/s/ Janet M. Lee
Abraham J. Colman
Felicia Y. Yu
Michael A. Garabed
Janet M. Lee
Attorneys for Defendant
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION

21
22
23
24
25
26
27

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:

.
The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California

28
–3–

Case No. 5:12-cv-00197-RMW

STIPULATION AND [] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS TO STAY