Opinion
Brian T. Glennon LATHAM & WATKINS LLP William Trach (pro hac vice), LATHAM & WATKINS LLP Brian T. Glennon (SBN 211012) Attorneys for Defendant LogMeIn, Inc.
Matthew M. Loker KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC Abbas Kazerounian (SBN 249203) Matthew M. Loker (SBN 279939) Attorneys for Plaintiff Darren Handy.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE (Doc. 13)
JENNIFER L. THURSTON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
TO THE HONORABLE COURT:
Plaintiff Darren Handy ("Plaintiff) and Defendant LogMeIn, Inc. ("Defendant"), by and through their respective undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on August 28, 2014 (ECF No. 1);
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2014, the Court issued an Order Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference setting a scheduling conference for December 17, 2014 (ECF No. 3);
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2014, the Court continued the scheduling conference until January 26, 2014 (ECF No. 4);
WHEREAS, Defendant waived service of the Complaint on December 1, 2014, and its response to the Complaint is due on January 30, 2014 (ECF No. 9);
WHEREAS, counsel for Defendant entered their notice of appearance on December 3, 2014 (ECF Nos. 5, 7);
WHEREAS, the Order Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference requires the parties to file a statement regarding their legal and factual contentions in their pleadings and contemplates an analysis of both parties' positions by January 16, 2014;
WHEREAS, Defendant's responsive pleading to the Complaint is not due until January 30, 2014 and Defendant is in the process of investigating Plaintiffs allegations and its potential defenses;
WHEREAS, the parties conferred and agree that continuing the scheduling conference until after Defendant's response deadline would allow a more meaningful analysis of each party's factual and legal contentions;
WHEREAS, holding the scheduling conference on February 26, 2015 would allow the Court to satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(2)'s requirement that a scheduling order issue within 120 days of service of the complaint upon defendant (i.e., by March 30, 2015) or within 90 days after a defendant has appeared (i.e., by March 3, 2014), whichever is earlier;
WHEREAS, extending the scheduling conference until February 26, 2015 would not delay any pending proceeding before the Court; and WHEREAS, this is the first request by either party to modify any deadline in this case;
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and agreed by and between the parties that:
1. The scheduling conference shall be continued until February 26, 2015; and
2. The parties shall otherwise comply with the deadlines imposed by the Court's Order Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference, including filing a joint report at least one full week prior to the scheduling conference.
ORDER
Based upon the stipulation of counsel and to allow time for Defendant to file its responsive pleading, the Court ORDERS:
1. The scheduling conference is CONTINUED to February 26, 2015 at 9:30 a.m.; and
2. No other modifications to the Court's Order Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference are authorized.
IT IS SO ORDERED.