Scott et al v. Google, Inc.

Filing 50

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh granting 49 Stipulation to Extend Page Limits of Google Inc.'s Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint.(lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

COOLEY LLP
MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127) ([e-mail])
WHITTY SOMVICHIAN (194463) ([e-mail])
RAY A. SARDO (245421) ([e-mail])
101 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-5800
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE INC.

7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN JOSE DIVISION

12
13
14

BRAD SCOTT and TODD HARRINGTON,
individually and on Behalf of those similarly
situated,

Case No. 12-cv-03413 LHK
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
TO EXTEND PAGE LIMITS OF GOOGLE
INC.’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS
MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF,
EQUITABLE RELIEF, AND FOR DAMAGES

Plaintiffs,

15
16

v.

17

GOOGLE, INC.,
Defendant.

18
19
20

This Stipulation is entered into by and among plaintiffs Brad Scott and Todd Harrington

21

(“Plaintiffs”) and defendant Google Inc. (“Google”) (collectively “the Parties”), by and through

22

their respective counsel.

23

WHEREAS, Google filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action

24

Complaint for Declaratory Relief, Equitable Relief, and for Damages (“Motion”) on October 10,

25

2012 (ECF No. 42);
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Google’s Motion to Dismiss on

26
27

November 7, 2012 (ECF No. 47);

28

///
1.

STIP & [PROP] ORDER TO EXTEND
PAGE LIMITS OF GOOGLE’S REPLY BRIEF
CASE NO. 12-cv-03413 LHK

1
2

WHEREAS, pursuant to this Court’s Order (ECF No. 38), the deadline for Google to file
its Reply in support of the Motion is November 21, 2012;

3

WHEREAS, Google’s Motion is scheduled for hearing on March 21, 2013;

4

WHEREAS, under Civil Local Rules 7-3(c) and 7-4(b), a reply brief or memorandum

5

may not exceed 15 pages of text unless the Court expressly orders otherwise pursuant to a party’s

6

request;

7
8

WHEREAS, under Civil Local Rule 7-11, a party may request permission to file a Reply
brief in excess of the normal page limits by way of administrative motion;

9

WHEREAS, under Civil Local Rule 7-11, any such administrative motion must be

10

accompanied by a proposed order and by either a stipulation under Civil L.R. 7-12 or by a

11

declaration that explains why a stipulation could not be obtained;

12

WHEREAS, the pending Motion raises issues of choice of law and statutory construction

13

that (from Google’s perspective) cannot be adequately briefed within the normal page limits for a

14

Reply brief;

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

WHEREAS, for these reasons, Google is seeking permission to extend the page limits for
its Reply by five pages (to a total of 20 pages);
WHEREAS, Google has met and conferred with Plaintiffs regarding this request, and
Plaintiffs do not oppose the request;
WHEREAS, extending the page limits for Google’s Reply will not alter the date of any
event or deadline already fixed by Court order;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree to extend the page limits for
Google’s Reply by five pages (to a total of 20 pages).
IT IS SO STIPULATED.

24
25
26
27
28
2.

STIP & [PROP] ORDER TO EXTEND
PAGE LIMITS OF GOOGLE’S REPLY BRIEF
CASE NO. 12-cv-03413 LHK

1

Dated: November 16, 2012

2
3
4

COOLEY LLP
MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127)
WHITTY SOMVICHIAN (194463)
RAY A. SARDO (245421)

________________________________________________
/s/ Ray A. Sardo

5

Ray A. Sardo (SBN 245421)
Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE INC.

6
7
8

Dated: November 16, 2012

9

CLAYEO C. ARNOLD (SBN 65070)
CLIFFORD LEE CARTER (SBN 149621)
KIRK J. WOLDEN (SBN 138902)

10
/s/ Kirk J. Wolden
_________________________________________________

11

Kirk J. Wolden (SBN 138902)
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
BRAD SCOTT and TODD HARRINGTON

12
13
14
15
16
17

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3)
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I, Ray Sardo, attest that concurrence in the filing of
this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories.

18
19

Dated: November 16, 2012

/s/ Ray A. Sardo
Ray Sardo

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3.

STIP & [PROP] ORDER TO EXTEND
PAGE LIMITS OF GOOGLE’S REPLY BRIEF
CASE NO. 12-cv-03413 LHK

1

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

2

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, the page limitation for Google’s Reply in support of its

3

Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action Complaint for Declaratory Relief,

4

Equitable Relief, and for Damages shall be extended by five pages (to a total of 20 pages).

5
6
7

Dated:

8

HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9
10
11
12

1294214/SF

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.

STIP & [PROP] ORDER TO EXTEND
PAGE LIMITS OF GOOGLE’S REPLY BRIEF
CASE NO. 12-cv-03413 LHK