Filed: Dec. 19, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 19, 2017
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT OF NNA'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS; [PROPOSED] ORDER HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . Defendant Nissan North America, Inc. ("NNA") and Plaintiffs Michelle Falk, Indhu Jayavelu, Patricia L. Cruz, Danielle Trotter, Amanda Macri, and Cynthia Garrison ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate to agree as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulated order (Dkt. No. 18), Plaintiff
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT OF NNA'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS; [PROPOSED] ORDER HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . Defendant Nissan North America, Inc. ("NNA") and Plaintiffs Michelle Falk, Indhu Jayavelu, Patricia L. Cruz, Danielle Trotter, Amanda Macri, and Cynthia Garrison ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate to agree as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulated order (Dkt. No. 18), Plaintiffs..
More
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT OF NNA'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS; [PROPOSED] ORDER
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., District Judge.
Defendant Nissan North America, Inc. ("NNA") and Plaintiffs Michelle Falk, Indhu Jayavelu, Patricia L. Cruz, Danielle Trotter, Amanda Macri, and Cynthia Garrison ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate to agree as follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulated order (Dkt. No. 18), Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint ("FAC"), on September 27, 2017. See Dkt. No. 19.
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' FAC asserts individual claims for Plaintiffs, and claims on behalf of a nationwide class, or in the alternative, six subclasses of residents from Plaintiffs' respective home states of California, Ohio, New York, Colorado, Massachusetts and Illinois ("Plaintiffs' States").
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' FAC asserts 15 claims for relief, including claims for breach of warranty under state and federal law, for alleged violation of eight (8) separate consumer protection statutes in Plaintiffs' States, and for broad equitable, injunctive, and declaratory relief. See FAC, Dkt. No. 19.
WHEREAS, NNA's filed its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' FAC on October 26, 2017 ("Motion"). See Dkt. No. 35.
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Stipulation Order (see Dkt. Nos. 18, 48), Plaintiffs filed their thirty-page Opposition to NNA's Motion on December 1, 2017. See Dkt. No. 49.
WHEREAS, NNA's Reply in support of its Motion is due December 21, 2017. See Dkt. No. 18.
WHEREAS, given the number and complexity of the claims asserted by Plaintiffs in the FAC, and in order to provide NNA an opportunity to adequately address Plaintiffs' Opposition, the Parties have agreed to provide NNA a five (5) page increase in the page limits set forth in Civil L.R. 7-3(c) for purposes of its Reply in Support of its Motion.
THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
• NNA's Reply memorandum in support of its Motion to Dismiss shall not exceed twenty (20) pages in length, exclusive of the caption page, table of contents, and table of authorities.
Attestation Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i), I, Michael J. Stortz, hereby attest that I have obtained concurrence in the filing of this document from the other signatory to this document.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 18th day of December, 2017 in San Francisco, California.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
