STIPULATION RE: DEFENDANTS PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD, KAREN ANTION, MIKE JOHNSON, JUANITA VIGIL, MIKE SCANLON AND CHUCK HARVEY'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT TO BE DEEMED ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

DONNA M. RYU, District Judge.

WHEREAS,

1. On October 5, 2012, Plaintiffs TRANSIT CONSTRUCTORS, LP and B&C TRANSIT, INC. (collectively "Plaintiffs") commenced this action in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Mateo, entitled Transit Constructors, LP and B&C Transit, Inc. v. Parsons Transportation Group, Inc., Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, Karen Antion, Juanita Vigil, Mike Johnson, Mike Scanlon, Charles Harvey and Does 1 through 50, Case No. CIV 517205 ("State Court Action").

2. On December 4, 2012, Defendants Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, Karen Antion, Juanita Vigil, Mike Johnson, Mike Scanlon and Charles Harvey (collectively "Defendants") timely filed an Answer to the Complaint in the State Court Action.

3. On December 5, 2012, Defendants properly removed the State Court Action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441 and 1446. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which derives from 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in that Plaintiffs' Complaint alleges a claim based on this federal law.

4. On December 21, 2012, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint in this action. The First Amended Complaint added a party, Karen Antion Consulting, LLC. The First Amended Complaint also made a few revisions and additions to the original Complaint, but did not add or delete any claims against Defendants.

5. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Defendants PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD, KAREN ANTION, JUANITA VIGIL, MIKE JOHNSON, MIKE SCANLON and CHARLES HARVEY ("Defendants"), and Plaintiffs TRANSIT CONSTRUCTORS, LP and B&C TRANSIT, INC. (hereinafter "Plaintiffs"), by and through their attorneys of record, that Defendants' answer and general denial to Plaintiffs' original Complaint in the State Court Action be deemed their answer and denial to the allegations of the First Amended Complaint herein.

The parties respectfully request the Court enter an order pursuant to the parties' stipulation set forth above.

6. Alternatively, if the Court does not grant the parties' proposed order upon the above-stipulation, Defendants and Plaintiffs STIPULATE AND AGREE that Defendants shall have a three week extension of time in which to answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint, from January 7, 2013 up to and including January 28, 2013. This extension will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

SIGNATURES UNDER LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3)

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3) of the United States District Court, Northern District of California, I, Alexandra V. Atencio—the ECF User whose User ID and Password are used in the filing of this document—hereby attest that the concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatory to this document.

ORDER

The parties having so stipulated,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Defendants PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD, KAREN ANTION, JUANITA VIGIL, MIKE JOHNSON, MIKE SCANLON and CHARLES HARVEY's ("Defendants") answer and general denial to Plaintiffs' original Complaint in the State Court Action be deemed their answer and denial to the allegations of the First Amended Complaint herein.

IT IS SO ORDERED.