From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Allen v. Conagra Foods Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 8, 2014
3:13-CV-01279-VC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2014)

Opinion

          STEVE W. BERMAN (pro hac vice), HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Seattle, WA, LEE M. GORDON, ELAINE T. BYSZEWSKI, HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Pasadena, CA, UREKA E. IDSTROM (pro hac vice), THE EUREKA LAW FIRM, Fairway, KS, Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class.

          Jeff D Friedman, Shana E. Scarlett, HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Berkeley, CA,


          [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S UNOPPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION FOR: (1) PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICAITON, AND (2) DEFENDANT'S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION

          VINCE CHHABRIA, District Judge.

         [PROPOSED] ORDER

         This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's unopposed administrative motion to exceed page limitation for (1) Plaintiff's memorandum in support of motion for class certification, and (2) Defendant's memorandum in opposition.

         Upon consideration of the unopposed administrative motion, the stipulation regarding page limits for class certification briefing, and good cause appearing, the motion is GRANTED.

         Accordingly, (1) Plaintiff's memorandum in support of her motion for class certification may exceed the page limitation by ten pages (not to exceed 25 pages), and (2) Defendant's memorandum in opposition to Plaintiff's motion may exceed the page limitation by ten pages (not to exceed 25 pages).

         IT IS SO ORDERED.

         Respectfully submitted.


Summaries of

Allen v. Conagra Foods Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 8, 2014
3:13-CV-01279-VC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2014)
Case details for

Allen v. Conagra Foods Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ERIN ALLEN, on behalf of herslef and all others similarly situated…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 8, 2014

Citations

3:13-CV-01279-VC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2014)