Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Nunes v. Twitter, Inc., 14-cv-02843-VC. (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150602a89 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 01, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 01, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND MODIFYING CASE SCHEDULE VINCE CHHABRIA , District Judge . Plaintiff Beverly Nunes ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Twitter, Inc. ("Twitter") (collectively, "the Parties") have met and conferred on the status of the above-captioned matter, and have jointly agreed to request a further three-month stay of proceedings in this matter through September 3, 2015, along with corresponding extensions to the existing discovery and su
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND MODIFYING CASE SCHEDULE

Plaintiff Beverly Nunes ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Twitter, Inc. ("Twitter") (collectively, "the Parties") have met and conferred on the status of the above-captioned matter, and have jointly agreed to request a further three-month stay of proceedings in this matter through September 3, 2015, along with corresponding extensions to the existing discovery and summary judgment briefing schedule.

In support of their stipulated request, the Parties state as follows:

1. On March 5, 2015, pursuant to stipulation of the Parties, the Court entered a three-month stay of all proceedings in this matter and modified discovery and summary judgment deadlines accordingly. The stay is currently scheduled to end on June 2, 2015.

2. On May 28, 2015, the Parties met and conferred through their respective counsel regarding a potential stipulation to extend the stay in this case.

3. Twitter believes the stay should be extended because issues presented in three proceedings currently pending before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) directly bear upon issues to be addressed by the Court in this action and may control this case. Specifically, in Marks v. Crunch San Diego, LLC, No. 14-56834 (9th Cir. appeal filed Nov. 21, 2014), the Ninth Circuit will address what is the proper definition of an "automatic telephone dialing system" under the TCPA. In Spokeo Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339 (certiorari granted April 27, 2015), the U.S. Supreme Court will resolve a circuit split on the question of whether a plaintiff alleging a statutory violation must show actual injury to demonstrate Article III standing. Oral argument in Spokeo is scheduled for the October 2015 term. Finally, there are currently five petitions pending before the FCC seeking rulings (i) clarifying that "prior express consent of the called party" for purposes of the TCPA means consent of the intended recipient of the call, and/or (ii) establishing a safe harbor so that businesses who make good faith efforts to comply with the TCPA cannot be held liable just because a wireless number has been reassigned. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced on May 27, 2015 that he has circulated a proposal to address these and other TCPA-related petitions, which will be voted on by the full Commission on June 18, 2015.

4. Plaintiff agrees that the stay in this case should be continued through September 3, 2015 in light of the FCC's imminent action on the recycled numbers and other TCPA-related petitions, but disagrees that the case should be stayed pending resolution of the Marks and Spokeo proceedings. Nevertheless, Plaintiff agrees that during the pendency of the continued stay, Twitter may move to further extend the stay beyond September 3, 2015.

THE PARTIES THEREFORE STIPULATE through their undersigned counsel, subject to the Court's approval, that:

1. The stay of all proceedings in this matter should be continued through September 3, 2015.

2. The existing case schedule should be modified as follows: Phase I Discovery shall be completed by December 30, 2015; Initial Expert Witness statements shall be submitted by January 15, 2015; Rebuttal Expert Witness statements shall be submitted by January 29, 2016; Motions for Summary Judgment on Phase 1 to be heard on May 19, 2016, 10:00 a.m.

3. If Twitter wishes to seek further extension of the stay past September 3, 2015, it may file a motion seeking such relief during the pendency of the stay. Any motion by Twitter to further continue the stay shall be due by July 8, 2015; any opposition by Plaintiff shall be due by July 29, 2015; Twitter's reply shall be due by August 5, 2015; and the matter will be set for hearing on a date on or after August 21, 2015, to be determined by the Court.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The stay of all proceedings in this matter are continued through September 3, 2015.

2. The existing case schedule is modified as follows: Phase I Discovery shall be completed by December 30, 2015; Initial Expert Witness statements shall be submitted by January 15, 2015; Rebuttal Expert Witness statements shall be submitted by January 29, 2016; Motions for Summary Judgment on Phase 1 to be heard on May 19, 2016, 10:00 a.m.

3. If Twitter wishes to seek further extension of the stay past September 3, 2015, it may file a motion seeking such relief during the pendency of the stay. Any motion by Twitter to further continue the stay shall be due by July 8, 2015; any opposition by Plaintiff shall be due by July 29, 2015; Twitter's reply shall be due by August 5, 2015; and the matter will be set for hearing on a date on or after August 21, 2015, to be determined by the Court.

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