Siegel v. Hewlett-Packard Company
Filing
42
STIPULATION AND ORDER (AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT) continuing briefing schedule and hearing on motion for summary judgment. Motion Hearing set for 7/30/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 5th Floor, San Jose before Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on June 6, 2013. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2013)
*E-FILED: June 6, 2013*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Karen E. Ford Esq.
SW Ocean Ave & Mission, Suite 208
P.O. Box 287
Carmel-by-the-Sea, California 93921-0287
831-250-6433
Fax 831-250-6844
karen@fordslaw.com
SBN 88358
Attorney for Plaintiff Peter Siegel
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
MELINDA S. RIECHERT, (SBN 65504)
mriechert@morganlewis.com
2 Palo Alto Square
3000 El Camino Real, Suite 700
Palo Alto, CA 94306
Tel: 650.843.4000
Fax: 650.843.4001
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
ADELMISE ROSEMÉ WARNER (SBN 215385)
adelmise.warner@morganlewis.com
One Market, Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, CA 94105-1126
Tel: 415.442.1000
Fax: 415.442.1001
Attorneys for Defendant
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY
17
18
United States District Court
Northern District of California
19
20
21
Peter Siegel,
Plaintiff,
22
23
24
25
vs.
Hewlett-Packard Company,
Defendant
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No: 5:12-cv-03787 HRL
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
CONTINUE MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGEMENT
26
27
28
Stipulation and Order Continuing MSJ - 1
1
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
2
3
Pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12 the parties, by an through their undersigned
4
counsel, hereby stipulate to entry of an order continuing the Motion for Summary Judgment filed
5
by Defendant Hewlett-Packard Company (“HP”) in this matter as set out below. Plaintiff’s
6
grounds for seeking this continuance are set out in the Declarations of Counsel filed in this action
7
with this stipulation and on April 4, 2013. Both parties agree to continuance on the grounds that
8
Plaintiff has not completed discovery he wishes to conduct in order to respond to Defendant’s
9
Motion for Summary Judgment. In entering into this stipulation Defendant is not waiving any
10
right to subsequently dispute the facts and contentions set out in Plaintiff’s April 4, 2013 Motion
11
for Continuance and the related Declaration of Counsel. Specifically, the parties stipulate as
12
follows:
13
30
The Motion for Summary Judgment shall be heard at 10:00 AM on Tuesday, July 23,
14
2013; and
15
Any Opposition by Plaintiff to the Motion for Summary Judgment will be filed and
16
served not later than July 9, 2013; and
17
Any Reply by Defendant to be filed and served not later than July 16, 2013.
18
19
20
Dated this 3rd day of June, 2013
21
22
/s/
Karen E. Ford Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
Peter Siegel
23
24
25
26
27
Date: ___________________________
28
Stipulation and Order Continuing MSJ - 2
1
/s/
Adelmise Rosemé Warner
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Attorney for Defendant
Hewlett-Packard Company
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ORDER
AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT,
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED,
^
9
10
11
12
June 6, 2013
Dated: ____________________
_______________________________
HOWARD R. LLOYD
United States Magistrate Judge
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Stipulation and Order Continuing MSJ - 3
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?