Free Stipulation and Order - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-02907-MHP

Document 15

Filed 08/05/2008

Page 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Daniel Keating-Traynor, by and through his attorney, Daniel Berko, and Defendant Comcast Inc. ("Comcast") by and through its attorneys Morgan, Lewis and Bockius LLP, hereby stipulate as follows: /// /// ///
DB2/20781844.2

DANIEL KEATING-TRAYNOR on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated; Plaintiffs, vs. AC SQUARE INC.; COMCAST INC.; AFSHIN GHANEH; ANDREW BAHMANYAR; AND DOES 1-60 INCLUSIVE; Defendants.

Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ALLOW COMCAST INC. TO FILE ITS MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT PRIOR TO THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Honorable Marilyn H. Patel

1

Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case 3:08-cv-02907-MHP

Document 15

Filed 08/05/2008

Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DB2/20781844.2

RECITALS A. On June 11, 2008, the Court set the Initial Case Management Conference in this

action for September 14, 2008. See Docket No. 2 (Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP). B. this action. C On July 11, 2008, Defendants AC Square, Ghaneh, and Bahmanyar filed Ex Parte On July 10, 2008, Plaintiff served Comcast with the Summons and Complaint in

Applications for Orders Allowing Defendants to File and Have Heard Motions to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) Prior to Initial Case Management Conference in Case No. CV-082907- MPH. See Docket Nos. 7, 8, and 9 (Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP). D. On July 15, 2008, the Court granted Defendants AC Square, Ghaneh, and

Bahmanyar's Ex Parte Applications for leave to file their motions to dismiss by July 21, 2008. The Court set the following related dates: Oppositions to be filed by August 4, 2008, Replies to be filed by August 11, 2008, and Motion to be heard on August 25, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. See Docket No. 10 (Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP). E. On or about July 15, 2008, the parties agreed to an extension of time for Comcast

to file a response to Plaintiff's Complaint, up to and including July 30, 2008. F. On July 16, 2008, the Court ordered Case No. CV-08-2907 and Case No. CV-08-

3035 related. See Docket No. 11 (Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP) and No. 16 (Case No. CV-083035-EDL). G. On July 17, 2008, Case No. CV-08-3035-EDL was reassigned to the Honorable

Judge Marilyn H. Patel. H. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(1)(A)(i) requires a defendant to file an

answer to a complaint within 20 days after being served, and that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b) allows a defendant to serve a motion to dismiss in lieu of an answer. The parties further agree that absent a Court Order allowing for an exception, Standing Order Number 4 prevents Defendant from filing the accompanying motion to dismiss until after the Initial Case Management Conference on September 15, 2008.
Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

2

Case 3:08-cv-02907-MHP

Document 15

Filed 08/05/2008

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DB2/20781844.2

TERMS OF STIPULATION 1. The parties jointly request that the Court allow Comcast to have its motion to

dismiss heard before the Initial Case Management Conference set for September 15, 2008 (Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP). 2. Defendant's motion seeks dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint, in its entirety,

without leave to amend. Should the Court decide to dispose of Plaintiff's claims against Comcast prior to the Initial Case Management Conference, Comcast could avoid incurring legal fees and costs by not having to file an answer or make initial disclosures. 3. The parties recognize that this Court granted on July 15, 2008 an ex parte motion

the other defendants brought for this same purpose in this action, and believe it should not be necessary to burden the Court with another such motion. 4. Based on the foregoing and in the interest of judicial economy, the parties agree

that Defendant should be allowed to file its motion at the earliest possible stage of this litigation. IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: July 30, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL BERKO

By

/s/ Daniel Berko Daniel Berko Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel Keating-Traynor

Dated: July 30, 2008

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

By

/s/ Daryl S. Landy Daryl S. Landy Attorneys for Defendant COMCAST INC.

3

Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case 3:08-cv-02907-MHP

Document 15

Filed 08/05/2008

Page 4 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO ORDERED that: The parties' request to allow Defendant to file the attached Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint is granted. Defendant shall file and serve the motion by no later than 15 August 11 _________________, 2008. The hearing on this motion is set for September 8, 2008, at 2:00 August 25 p.m. Any opposition to the motion shall be filed and served by __________________, 2008. September 2 Any reply to the opposition shall be filed and served by ________________, 2008.

UNIT ED

August 1, 2008 Dated: ___________________

By: _____________________________ United States District Court Judge

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

DB2/20781844.2

4

Case No. CV-08-2907-MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

A

C

LI

FO

arily Judge M

tel n H. Pa

R NIA

O ORD IT IS S

ERED

RT U O

NO

RT

H