STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR LEAVE TO FILE INSTANTER ENLARGED OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS AND EXTEND TIME FOR REPLY

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, District Judge.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Miguel Garcia ("Plaintiff") filed his First Amended Complaint on March 28, 2014; and

WHEREAS, Defendants Lyft, Inc. and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. ("Defendants") filed a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint, supporting Memorandum, and Request for Judicial Notice on April 28, 2014; and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to the Request for Judicial Notice, and an Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss on May 12, 2014 that is 19-pages in length;

WHEREAS, on May 13, 2014, Defendants informed Plaintiff that its Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss exceeded the Court's 15-page limitation, but indicated that they would not object to the enlarged brief if Defendants were permitted an additional week to prepare and file their Reply in Support of their Motion to Dismiss, and Reply in Support of their Request for Judicial Notice;

WHEREAS, Defendants' assent to Plaintiff's enlarged brief is contingent upon an extension of time for Defendants' filing of Reply briefs;

WHEREAS, Defendants' Reply in Support of their Motion to Dismiss and Reply in Support of their Request for Judicial Notice are presently due on May 19, 2014.

THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

STIPULATION

1. The parties, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and respectfully request that Plaintiff be permitted to file instanter an enlarged brief in opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss of 19-pages in length, which is presently filed at Docket Number 40;

2. The parties, by and through their undersigned counsel, further stipulate and respectfully request that Defendants' time in which to file a Reply in Support of their Motion to Dismiss and Reply in Support of their Request for Judicial Notice be extended by one week and one day, from May 19, 2014 to May 27, 2014, to account for the Memorial Day holiday.

3. The reason for the requested change of time for the Defendants' filing of their Reply in support of their Motion to Dismiss is to give Defendants sufficient time to fully consider and brief the issues raised by Plaintiff's filed Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, and thereby give the Court a complete record for consideration.

4. Four other time modifications have been made by stipulation in this matter. On February 21, 2014, Plaintiff and Enterprise stipulated that the time for Enterprise to respond to the original Complaint would be extended until April 4, 2014. See Dkt. 19. On February 25, 2014, Plaintiff and Lyft stipulated that the time for Lyft to respond to the original Complaint would also be extended to April 4, 2014. See Dkt. 25. Following the filing of the First Amended Complaint, the parties stipulated to extend the time for Defendants to respond to the First Amended Complaint until April 28, 2014, and the Court so ordered on March 31, 2014. See Dkt. 30. Finally, the parties stipulated to continue their Initial Discovery Deadlines until May 15, 2014 and May 29, 2014 respectively, and to continue the Case Management Conference, which the Court so ordered on April 7, 2014. Pursuant to the April 7, 2014 order, the Case Management Conference was continued until June 18, 2014. Additionally, the Court previously ordered that the initial Case Management Conference be continued from May 6, 2014 to May 7, 2014. See Dkt. 23. No other time modifications have been ordered by the Court.

5. The effect of this requested time modification would be to extend the briefing scheduling on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, and Request for Judicial Notice by one week. To allow the Court sufficient time to fully consider the briefing submitted in support of and opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, the parties agree that—at the Court's discretion— the hearing date for the Motion should also be extended by 7 days, i.e., from June 10, 2014 to June 17, 2014.

6. All parties agree to the stipulation as indicated by their signatures below. The parties respectfully request that the Court approve the stipulation, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2 and enter an Order thereupon. A form of Proposed Order is filed herewith.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

The Court having considered the above joint request, and good standing appearing therefore, HEREBY ORDERS that:

(1) Plaintiff may file a 19-page brief in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. The brief filed at Docket Number 40 is hereby deemed filed; and

(2) Defendants' Reply in Support of their Motion to Dismiss, and Reply in Support of Request for Judicial Notice shall be filed by May 27, 2014.

Further, the June 10, 2014 hearing at 1:00 p.m. on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, (Dkt. 33), is vacated and reset for June 17, 2014 at 1:00 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.