Bruton v. Gerber Products Company et al

Filing 31

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh granting 30 Stipulation Re Briefing Schedule for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.(lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/15/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

BRYAN A. MERRYMAN (SBN 134357)
THOMAS J. BENEDICT (SBN 204420)
WHITE & CASE LLP
633 W. Fifth Street, Suite 1900
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2007
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
GERBER PRODUCTS COMPANY
and NESTLÉ USA, INC.
BEN F. PIERCE GORE (SBN 128515)
PRATT & ASSOCIATES
1901 S. Bascom Avenue, Suite 350
Campbell, CA 95008
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
NATALIA BRUTON

13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
SAN JOSE DIVISION
16
17

NATALIA BRUTON, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,

18
19
20

Plaintiff,
v.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
FOR DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED
COMPLAINT

GERBER PRODUCTS COMPANY,
and NESTLÉ USA, INC.,

21
Defendants.
22

NO. CV 12-02412 LHK

Judge: Hon. Lucy H. Koh
Action Filed: May 11, 2012
Trial Date: None

23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT; CV 12-02412 LHK

1

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), Plaintiff Natalia Bruton, individually and on behalf of all

2

others similarly situated (“Plaintiff”), and Defendants Gerber Products Company and Nestlé

3

USA, Inc. (“Defendants”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of

4

record, hereby stipulate to a briefing schedule for Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s

5

Amended Complaint.

6

WHEREAS, on September 21, 2012, Plaintiff filed a putative class action Amended

7

Complaint against Defendants, alleging violations of Cal. Bus & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq. and

8

17500, et seq., Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750, et seq. and 1790, et seq, and 15. U.S.C. § 2301, et seq.,

9

and restitution.

10
11
12
13

WHEREAS, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (the
“Motion”) on October 5, 2012.
WHEREAS, under Local Rule 7-3, Plaintiff’s response to Defendants’ Motion is due on
October 19, 2012, and Defendants’ reply is due on October 26, 2012.

14

WHEREAS, Plaintiff requires additional time to respond to Defendants’ Motion.

15

WHEREAS, the Parties have reserved the Court’s first available date of January 10, 2013,

16
17
18
19

for the hearing on Defendants’ Motion.
WHEREAS, the stipulated extension is not sought for the purpose of unnecessary delay
and will not alter the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE the time for

20

Plaintiff to respond to Defendants’ Motion is extended to November 16, 2012, and the time for

21

Defendants to reply to Plaintiff’s response is extended to December 17, 2012.

22

Dated: October 12, 2012

WHITE & CASE LLP

23

By:

24
25

Dated: October 12, 2012

/s/ Bryan A. Merryman
Bryan A. Merryman
Attorneys for Defendants

PRATT & ASSOCIATES

26
By:

27
28

/s/ Pierce Gore
Ben F. Pierce Gore
Attorneys for Plaintiff

1
STIPULATION RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT; CV 12-02412 LHK

1
2

DECLARATION OF PIERCE GORE
I, Pierce Gore, am an attorney of record for Plaintiff Natalia Bruton. Bryan A. Merryman,

3

attorney of record for Defendants Gerber Products Company and Nestle USA, Inc., gave me his

4

concurrence in the filing of the document titled “STIPULATION RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE

5

FOR DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT,”

6

which concurrence shall serve in lieu of his signature on that filed document. I have and will

7

maintain records to support this concurrence for subsequent production to the Court if so ordered

8

or for inspection upon request by a party until one year after final resolution of the action

9

(including appeal, if any).

10
11

Dated: October 12, 2012

PRATT & ASSOCIATES

12
By:

13
14

/s/ Pierce Gore
Pierce Gore
Attorney for Plaintiff

15
[PROPOSED] ORDER

16
17

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

18

The following briefing schedule shall apply to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the

19

Amended Complaint: Plaintiff’s opposition is due November 16, 2012, Defendants’ reply is due

20

December 17, 2012 and a hearing on the Motion shall be held on January 10, 2013.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23
24

Dated: October

, 2012

___________________________
HON. LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28
2
STIPULATION RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT; CV 12-02412 LHK