From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fafard v. Apple Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 15, 2013
Case No. 3:12-cv-05125-CW (N.D. Cal. Mar. 15, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 3:12-cv-05125-CW

03-15-2013

BARBARA FAFARD, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff, v. APPLE INC., BEST BUY CO., INC.; and INCOMM HOLDINGS, INC., Defendants.

Abraham J. Colman (SBN 146933) Felicia Y. Yu (SBN 193316) Mathew M. Wrenshall (SBN 284466) REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for Defendants INCOMM HOLDINGS, INC. and BEST BUY CO., INC.


Abraham J. Colman (SBN 146933)
Felicia Y. Yu (SBN 193316)
Mathew M. Wrenshall (SBN 284466)
REED SMITH LLP
Attorneys for Defendants
INCOMM HOLDINGS, INC. and BEST BUY
CO., INC.

STIPULATED REQUEST AND

[PROPOSED] ORDER TO FURTHER

EXTEND DEFENDANTS' TIME TO

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

TO ALLOW THE PARTIES TO

PARTICIPATE IN FURTHER

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS AND

MEDIATION

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-1 and 7-12, Plaintiff Barbara Fafard and Defendants Apple Inc., Best Buy Co. Inc., and InComm Holdings, Inc. ("InComm"), through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate to further extend the time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. This additional extension of time will enable the parties to continue to attempt to resolve the dispute.

Plaintiff and counsel for InComm, as well as certain InComm representatives, met in Philadelphia on March 7, 2013 to discuss the possible resolution of the dispute. The parties have also scheduled a mediation session in front of Hon. Ronald M. Sabraw (Ret.) for April 25, 2013.

The parties shall file a joint status report informing the Court of the progress or outcome of the mediation on or before April 27, 2013. In the event that the parties' mediation efforts are continuing to progress as of April 27, 2013, they shall be permitted an additional 30 days to continue those efforts and, in such an event, will be required to file a joint status report by no later than May 28, 2013.

If any party deems the mediation efforts to be unsuccessful, they shall so advise the Court and within 21 days thereof the Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff's Complaint.

Should Defendants elect to file a Rule 12 motion, the date by which Plaintiff's response to any such motion would be due shall be extended by an additional 21 days.

The date by which any reply in further support of any Rule 12 motion shall be filed shall also be extended by an additional 14 days.

MARCUS & AUERBACH LLC

By ___________

Jonathan Auerbach

Attorney for Plaintiff

BARBARA FAFARD

REED SMITH LLP

By Felicia Yu

Abraham J. Colman

Felicia Yu

Mathew M. Wrenshall

Attorney for Defendants

INCOMM HOLDINGS, INC. AND BEST BUY

CO. INC.

PAUL HASTINGS

By _____________

David M. Walsh

Attorney for Defendant

APPLE INC.

FILER'S ATTESTATION

I, Felicia Yu, attest that as the ECF filer of this Stipulation I obtained concurrence for this filing from all signatories to this document.

REED SMITH LLP

By _________________

Felicia Yu

Attorney for Defendants

INCOMM HOLDINGS, INC. AND BEST BUY

CO. INC.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED that the Defendants' response date to Plaintiff's Complaint shall be extended so that the parties can participate in mediation. Defendants' response date to Plaintiff's Complaint shall be 21 days after any party advises the Court that mediation efforts have been unsuccessful. Plaintiff shall have an additional 21 days to respond to any dispositive motion that Defendants might file and Defendants shall have an additional 14 days to file a reply in support of any dispositive motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED:

______________________

The Honorable CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Court Judge


Summaries of

Fafard v. Apple Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 15, 2013
Case No. 3:12-cv-05125-CW (N.D. Cal. Mar. 15, 2013)
Case details for

Fafard v. Apple Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA FAFARD, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 15, 2013

Citations

Case No. 3:12-cv-05125-CW (N.D. Cal. Mar. 15, 2013)