Dunstan et al v. comScore, Inc.

Filing 46

DECLARATION of Ray Sardo regarding response in opposition to motion 45 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Somvichian, Whitty)

EXHIBIT B

Case5:10-cv-02389-JW Document8

1
2
3

Filed06/24/10 Page1 of 3

EDELSON MCGUIRE LLP
SEAN REIS (184044) ([e-mail])
30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

4
5
6
7

JAY EDELSON ([e-mail])
MICHAEL J. ASCHENBRENER ([e-mail])
BENJAMIN H. RICHMAN ([e-mail])
350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

8
Attorneys for Plaintiff DAVID GOULD
9
10
11
12

COOLEY LLP
MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127) ([e-mail])
MATTHEW D. BROWN (196972) ([e-mail])
101 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

13
Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, Inc.
14
15
16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
SAN JOSE DIVISION
19
20
21

DAVID GOULD, an individual, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated,

22

Plaintiff,

23
24
25

Case No. CV-10-02389-JW-PVT
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO
RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (L.R. 6-1(a))

v.

Courtroom:
Judge:
Trial Date:

FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware corporation,

8
James Ware
None Set

Defendant.

26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1.

STIP. TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL.
CV-10-02389-JW-PVT

Case5:10-cv-02389-JW Document8

Filed06/24/10 Page2 of 3

1

Plaintiff David Gould (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”) (Plaintiff

2

and Facebook collectively “the Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, stipulate and

3

agree as follows:

4
5

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed the Complaint in the above-entitled action in the United States
District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division, on May 28, 2010;

6

WHEREAS, Plaintiff served the Complaint on Facebook on June 9, 2010;

7

WHEREAS, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a), the current deadline for

8

Facebook to respond to the Complaint is June 30, 2010;

9

WHEREAS, under Civil Local Rule 6-1(a), parties may stipulate in writing, without a

10

court order, to extend the time within which to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint; and

11

WHEREAS, extending the date for Facebook to answer the Complaint, move under

12

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12 with respect to the Complaint, or otherwise respond to the

13

Complaint to and including July 30, 2010 will not alter the date of any event or deadline already

14

fixed by Court order;

15

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

16

Facebook’s deadline to answer the Complaint, move under Federal Rule of Civil

17

Procedure 12 with respect to the Complaint, or otherwise respond to the Complaint is extended to

18

and including July 30, 2010.

19

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

2.

STIP. TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL.
CV-10-02389-JW-PVT

Case5:10-cv-02389-JW Document8

1

Dated: June 24, 2010

Filed06/24/10 Page3 of 3

COOLEY LLP

2
/s/Matthew D. Brown
Matthew D. Brown
Attorneys for Defendant Facebook, Inc.

3
4
5

Dated: June 24, 2010

EDELSON MCGUIRE, LLC

6
7

/s/Michael J. Aschenbrener
Michael J. Aschenbrener
Attorneys for Plaintiff David Gould

8
9
10

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45

11
12

I, Matthew D. Brown, attest that concurrence in the filing of this Stipulation to Extend
13
Time to Respond to Complaint (L.R. 6-1(a)) has been obtained from each of the other signatories.
14
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
15
foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 24th day of June, 2010, at San Francisco, California.
16
17
18

/s/Matthew D. Brown
Matthew D. Brown

19
20
1184816 v1/SF

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

3.

STIP. TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPL.
CV-10-02389-JW-PVT