Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Figy v. Frito-Lay North America, Inc., C 13-3988-SC. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20140319f06 Visitors: 19
Filed: Mar. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 18, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE IN CONNECTION WITH DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge. Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Local Rule 6-2, the undersigned counsel of record for Plaintiffs Robert Figy and Mary Swearingen ("Plaintiffs") and Defendant Frito-Lay North America, Inc. ("Defendant") stipulate and agree to a briefing schedule in connection with Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' First Class Action and Representative Action Complaint f
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE IN CONNECTION WITH DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge.

Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Local Rule 6-2, the undersigned counsel of record for Plaintiffs Robert Figy and Mary Swearingen ("Plaintiffs") and Defendant Frito-Lay North America, Inc. ("Defendant") stipulate and agree to a briefing schedule in connection with Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' First Class Action and Representative Action Complaint for Equitable and Injunctive Relief ("Amended Complaint"), subject to the Court's approval, as follows:

WHEREAS, on December 19, 2013, the Court approved of the parties' stipulation to allow Plaintiffs to file an Amended Complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1) and to provide Defendant with sixty (60) days to answer or otherwise respond to that Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, on January 10, 2014, Plaintiffs filed their Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS on March 11, 2014, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, under N.D. Cal. Local Rule 7-3, Plaintiffs' opposition to Defendant's motion is currently due on March 25, 2014, and Defendant's reply would be due seven (7) days after Plaintiffs serve their opposition;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that longer time periods are necessary to brief the Motion to Dismiss;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendant agree that, pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 and subject to the Court's approval, the time for Plaintiffs to file their opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss shall be extended until April 18, 2014;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendant agree that, pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 and subject to the Court's approval, the time for Defendant to file its reply to Plaintiffs' opposition shall be thirty (30) days after service of the opposition; and

WHEREAS, the parties agree that this stipulation does not waive any right of the parties to request or stipulate to further extensions;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the Court's approval, that:

(1) Plaintiffs will file their opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss by April 18, 2014; and

(2) Defendant shall have until thirty (30) days after the filing of the opposition to file its reply.

In accordance with N.D. Cal. Local Rule 5-1, the filer of this document hereby attests that the concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatories hereto.

PURSUANT TO THIS 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