Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Baker-Rhett v. Aspiro AB, 4:16-cv-02013-JSW. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160719734 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jul. 18, 2016
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, MANHATTAN DIVISION First Amended Complaint filed May 9, 2016 JEFFREY S. WHITE , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff Justin Baker-Rhett ("Plaintiff"), defendant Aspiro AB ("Aspiro"), and defendant Kanye West ("West") (collectively "the parties") by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby respectfully stipulate and agree as follows: WHEREAS, on June
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, MANHATTAN DIVISION

First Amended Complaint filed May 9, 2016

STIPULATION

Plaintiff Justin Baker-Rhett ("Plaintiff"), defendant Aspiro AB ("Aspiro"), and defendant Kanye West ("West") (collectively "the parties") by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby respectfully stipulate and agree as follows:

WHEREAS, on June 20, 2016, Aspiro filed a motion pursuant to Motion to Transfer Venue or, in the Alternative, Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. 18] ("Motion") to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Manhattan Division;

WHEREAS, pursuant to the parties' stipulation, Plaintiff's opposition to Aspiro's Motion is due by July 19, 2016 [Dkt. 21];

WHEREAS, since the filing of the Motion, the parties have met and conferred and reached an agreement that it is in the interest of justice to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Manhattan Division. Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), all parties consent to the transfer of this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Manhattan Division;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that notwithstanding the transfer of this action, any deposition of West will take place in the State of California at a mutually convenient time and place, to be determined at a later date.

NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. The Court shall vacate all dates in this Court, transfer the above-captioned action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Manhattan Division and close its file in the Northern District of California;

2. Aspiro's Motion [Dkt. 18] is withdrawn and the August 19, 2016 hearing date vacated;

3. Aspiro shall have 21 days from assignment to a district court judge in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Manhattan Division to file an answer and affirmative defenses or otherwise plead in response to Plaintiff's operative complaint.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, 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