From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Botti v. Trans Union, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 14, 2011
CASE NO. 4:11-cv-04519-SBA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. 4:11-cv-04519-SBA

11-14-2011

JOHN R. BOTTI, III Plaintiff, v. TRANS UNION, LLC, Defendant.

William R. Brown, Esq. (IN #26782-48) Schuckit & Associates, P.C. Lead Counsel for Defendant Trans Union, LLC Michael W. Bien, Esq. (CSB #96891) Sumana Cooppan, Esq. (CSB # 267967) Rosen, Bien & Galvan, LLP Local Counsel for Defendant Trans Union, LLC


William R. Brown, Esq. (IN #26782-48)

Schuckit & Associates, P.C.

Lead Counsel for Defendant Trans Union, LLC

Michael W. Bien, Esq. (CSB #96891)

Sumana Cooppan, Esq. (CSB # 267967)

Rosen, Bien & Galvan, LLP

Local Counsel for Defendant Trans Union, LLC

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR TRANS UNION, LLC'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO RULE 12(b)(6)

Pro se Plaintiff John R. Botti, III ("Plaintiff) and Defendant Trans Union, LLC ("Trans Union") (collectively, the "Parties") pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 hereby submit their Joint Stipulation To Extend Briefing Schedule For Trans Union, LLC's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint Pursuant To Rule 12(b)(6) (the "Stipulation").

In support of the Stipulation, the Parties state:

1. On September 12, 2011. pro se Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this action [Doc. No. 1].

2. On September 29, 2011, the Parties filed a Stipulation For Enlargement Of Time For Trans Union, LLC To Answer Or Otherwise Respond [Doc. No. 8].

3. On November 3, 2011, Trans Union filed its Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint Pursuant To Rule 12(b)(6) For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted [Doe. No. 20] (the "Motion") and accompanying Memorandum Of Law.

4. Plaintiff's Response to the Motion currently is due by November 17, 2011 and Trans Union's Reply by November 28, 2011.

5. Pro se Plaintiff has determined that he will need additional time to respond to the Motion, in order to fully address the issues raised therein. Trans Union does not object to this request. The Parties have conferred and agreed to the revised briefing schedule set forth herein. The dates selected take into account the fact that Plaintiff and Trans Union are receiving service of filings by United States Mail, since Plaintiff is proceeding pro se.

6. Accordingly, the Parties have stipulated to extend Plaintiff's time to respond to the Motion until December 1, 2011 and Trans Union's time to reply in support of the Motion until December 15, 201 1.

7. The hearing on the Motion is set for March 27, 2012 and the Stipulation will not alter the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order or have any other effect on the schedule for the case.

8. The only previous time modification in this case was by stipulation of the parties to extend Trans Union's time to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint, as stated above.

9. This Stipulation is not made for the purposes of delay and would not prejudice any Party.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the Parties that Plaintiff shall have until December 1, 2011 to file his Response to the Motion and Trans Union shall have until December 15, 2011 to file its Reply in support of the Motion. SO STIPULATED by:

John R. Botti, III

Pro Se Plaintiff

William R. Brown, Esq.

Schuckit & Associates, P.C.

Lead Counsel for Defendant Trans Union, LLC PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

PROOF OF SERVICE

I, William R. Brown, declare that I am a resident of the State of Indiana, am over the age of eighteen years and am not a party to the within action. I am employed with Schuckit & Associates, P.C., whose address is 4545 Northwestern Drive, Zionsville, IN 46077. On November 14, 2011. I served the following documents:

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR TRANS UNION, LLC'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO RULE 12(b)(6)
I served the documents on the persons listed below, as follows:
[ ] By messenger service. I served the documents by placing them in an envelope or package addressed to the persons listed below and providing them to a professional messenger service for service. (A declaration by the messenger is attached hereto as a separate document.)
[ X ] By United States mail. I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons listed below and placed the envelope or package for collection and mailing in accordance with our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with my firm's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. I am a resident or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. The envelope or package was placed in the mail at Zionsville, Indiana.
All documents were sent to the following persons in the following manner:
John R. Botti, III
1163 Capri Drive
Campbell, CA 95008-6003
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Indiana that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this Proof of Service was executed on this 14th day of November, 2011, at Zionsville, Indiana.

William R. Brown, Esq.

Schuckit & Associates, P.C.

Lead Counsel for Defendant Trans Union, LLC


Summaries of

Botti v. Trans Union, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 14, 2011
CASE NO. 4:11-cv-04519-SBA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2011)
Case details for

Botti v. Trans Union, LLC

Case Details

Full title:JOHN R. BOTTI, III Plaintiff, v. TRANS UNION, LLC, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

Date published: Nov 14, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. 4:11-cv-04519-SBA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2011)