Opinion
Case No. CV-09-03156 SI
10-19-2011
KERSHAW, CUTTER, & RATINOFF LLP CLARK & MARKHAM LLP LAW OFFICES OF BARRON E. RAMOS CHARLES E. AMES, P.C. THE CROSLEY LAW FIRM, P.C. WEXLER WALLACE LLP Stuart C. Talley Attorneys for Plaintiffs FENWICK & WEST LLP Kevin P. Muck Attorneys for Defendants FREEDOM FINANCIAL NETWORK, LLC, FREEDOM DEBT RELIEF, INC. and FREEDOM DEBT RELIEF, LLC SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP Allen Ruby Attorneys for Defendants BRADFORD STROH and ANDREW HOUSSER GREENSPOON MARDER, P.A. Rebecca Bratter Attorneys for Defendants GLOBAL CLIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC and ROCKY MOUNTAIN BANK & TRUST
KEVIN P. MUCK (CSB NO. 120918)
kmuck@fenwick.com
CHRISTOPHER J. STESKAL (CSB NO. 212297)
csteskal@fenwick.com
JENNIFER BRETAN (CSB NO. 233475)
jbretan@fenwick.com
MARIE C. BAFUS (CSB NO. 258417)
mbafus@fenwick.com
FENWICK & WEST LLP
555 California Street, 12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 875-2300
Facsimile: (415) 281-1350
Attorneys for Defendants
Freedom Financial Network, LLC, Freedom Debt
Relief, Inc. and Freedom Debt Relief, LLC
STIPULATION SETTING TIME TO
RESPOND TO THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT
WHEREAS, on October 3, 2011, the Court issued an order ("Order") granting plaintiffs leave to amend;
WHEREAS, the Order was without prejudice to defendants' right to move to compel to arbitration the claims of newly added plaintiffs, Ms. Mays and Ms. Hall;
WHEREAS, the Order did not affect the Court's prior order of July 5, 2011, granting defendants' motion to compel the claims of each of the prior named plaintiffs to arbitration;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Order, plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint on October 7, 2011, and a response is due October 24, 2011 under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) and 15(a)(3);
WHEREAS, as contemplated by the Order, certain defendants will be filing a motion to compel arbitration by October 25, 2011;
WHEREAS, because the Court's decision on the motion to compel arbitration will likely affect the nature of defendants' responses to the Third Amended Complaint, and could even render such responses unnecessary, all Parties agree that the time to respond to the Third Amended Complaint should be set for a reasonable period following the Court's decision on the upcoming motion to compel arbitration;
WHEREAS, in setting the response date, the Parties are not altering the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court Order;
IT IS ACCORDINGLY STIPULATED, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1(a), by and between the undersigned counsel for the Parties that:
1. Any motion to compel arbitration by defendants shall be filed by October 25, 2011;
2. Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-1(a), defendants need not answer, move or otherwise respond to the Third Amended Complaint until after the Court has ruled on defendants' motion to compel arbitration; and
3. In the event that the defendants' motion to compel arbitration is denied, defendants will respond to the Third Amended Complaint with fifteen (15) days from service of the Court's order.
KERSHAW, CUTTER, & RATINOFF LLP
CLARK & MARKHAM LLP
LAW OFFICES OF BARRON E. RAMOS
CHARLES E. AMES, P.C.
THE CROSLEY LAW FIRM, P.C.
WEXLER WALLACE LLP
By: Stuart C. Talley
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
FENWICK & WEST LLP
By: Kevin P. Muck
Attorneys for Defendants FREEDOM FINANCIAL
NETWORK, LLC, FREEDOM DEBT RELIEF, INC. and
FREEDOM DEBT RELIEF, LLC
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
By: Allen Ruby
Attorneys for Defendants
BRADFORD STROH and ANDREW HOUSSER
GREENSPOON MARDER, P.A.
By: Rebecca Bratter
Attorneys for Defendants GLOBAL CLIENT
SOLUTIONS, LLC and ROCKY MOUNTAIN BANK &
TRUST
Pursuant to General Order No. 45 Section X(B), all of the signatories concur in the filing of this stipulation.
FENWICK & WEST LLP
By: Jennifer C. Bretan