Summary
differentiating the Ross claims from the claims in the MDL proceeding: "A significant distinction between the MDL Proceeding and this case is that Plaintiffs have asserted that the arbitration clauses stemmed from an unlawful conspiracy in violation of the antitrust laws. . . . In sharp contrast, Plaintiffs asserted no such claim in the MDL Proceeding."
Summary of this case from In re Currency Conversion FeeOpinion
No. 04 CV 05723 (WHP) Class Action Jury Trial Demanded.
February 15, 2005
Merrill G. Davidoff, Esquire, Edward W. Millstein, Esquire, Berger Montague, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, Counsel for Plaintiffs.
Jonathan M. Jacobson, Esquire, Mitchell P. Hurley, Esquire, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Feld LLP, New York, NY, Counsel for Defendants.
STIPULATION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs and Defendants (collectively the "parties"), through their undersigned counsel, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Plaintiffs shall file and serve their motion for class certification by February 18, 2005;
2. Defendants shall file and serve their opposition to the motion for class certification by March 25, 2005;
3. Plaintiffs shall file and serve a reply, if any, on the motion for class certification by April 15, 2005;
4. Oral argument on the class certification motion shall remain as scheduled for May 13, 2005, at 11:00 a.m., as Ordered by this Court in its Scheduling Order No. 1 dated December 9, 2004.
SO ORDERED.