Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

KELLY v. BAY AREA TOLL AUTHORITY, 3:16-cv-06837-RS. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20170127n17 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jan. 25, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 25, 2017
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS; [PROPOSED] ORDER [PRIVACY CLASS ACTION] RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . STIPULATION This Stipulation is entered into by and between lead plaintiff, Michelle Kelly ("Plaintiff") and defendants Bay Area Toll Authority, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, and Xerox State and Local Solutions, Inc. (collectively, the "Defendants") by and through their respective attorneys of record.
More

JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS; [PROPOSED] ORDER

[PRIVACY CLASS ACTION]

STIPULATION

This Stipulation is entered into by and between lead plaintiff, Michelle Kelly ("Plaintiff") and defendants Bay Area Toll Authority, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, and Xerox State and Local Solutions, Inc. (collectively, the "Defendants") by and through their respective attorneys of record.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint ("Complaint") was removed to this Court on November 28, 2016;

WHEREAS, on January 6, 2016, each of the Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (collectively, the "Motions");

WHEREAS pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rules 7-2 and 7-3, the Parties agree that this Motion involves several questions of law requiring an extended period by which the parties may respond and reply;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rules 7-2 and 7-3, by and between the undersigned counsel for the parties that:

Plaintiff's oppositions to the Motions (or an amended pleading) shall be filed on or before February 3, 2017;

Defendants' replies in support of their Motions shall be filed on or before February 16, 2017;

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED, that by entering into this Stipulation, Defendants are not waiving their right to seek a stay of all discovery in this matter pending the Court's ruling on Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, including a stay on providing initial disclosures and engaging in a Rule 26(f) conference.

ECF ATTESTATION

I, Blake J. Lindemann, am the ECF User whose ID and Password are being used to file this document. I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatories.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer