STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTION TO CERTIFY

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, Chief District Judge.

STIPULATION

1. On Thursday, October 5, 2017, defendants Purdue Pharma L.P., Purdue Pharma, Inc., and The Purdue Frederick Company, Inc. ("Defendants") filed a Motion to Certify Question to the Washington Supreme Court [Dkt. No. 31] (the "Motion to Certify").

2. Pursuant to LCR 7(d)(3), the deadline for plaintiff City of Everett ("Plaintiff") to file its opposition papers to the Motion to Certify is currently October 16, 2017. In addition to that deadline, Plaintiff's opposition to the recently filed Motion for Transfer of Actions before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (in Case MDL No. 2804, which is captioned as "In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation") is currently due on October 20, 2017. Plaintiff's

Amended Complaint in this action is also due October 25, 2017. Accordingly, in order to have sufficient time to prepare opposition papers to the Motion to Certify (as well as address conflicting scheduling issues in this action, the MDL proceeding, and in other matters), counsel for Plaintiff has requested from Defendants a short, two-week extension to October 30, 2017.

3. Counsel for Defendants do not oppose this request, and have requested a corresponding short extension of the deadline for Defendants to file their reply brief. Specifically, Defendants request to file their reply brief on November 17, 2017 and re-note their Motion to Certify for November 17, 2017.

4. Counsel for the parties have met and conferred in good faith regarding the deadlines and briefing schedule, and believe there is good cause for the requested extensions of time and proposed briefing schedule, and the parties' stipulation will not delay this proceeding or cause prejudice.

5. Accordingly, pursuant to the parties' stipulation, and subject to the Court's approval, the parties specifically agree as follows:

SO STIPULATED

ORDER

Pursuant to the above Stipulated Motion IT IS SO ORDERED