Opinion
No. C-06-7363-SI.
January 23, 2007
BRADLEY J. SCHRAM (Michigan State Bar No. P26337), ROBERT P. GELLER (Michigan State Bar No. P34391), EVA T. CANTARELLA (Michigan State Bar No. P51917), HERTZ, SCHRAM SARETSKY, P.C., Bloomfield Hills, Michigan.
SCOTT KALKIN (California State Bar No. 120791), ROBOOSTOFF KALKIN, San Francisco, California, Attorneys for Plaintiff, Kathleen Stewart.
JEFFREY D. WOHL (California State Bar No. 96838), PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY WALKER LLP, San Francisco, California.
STEPHEN H. HARRIS (California State Bar No. 184608), CAROLINE LEE ELKIN (California State Bar No. 209156), PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY WALKER LLP, Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Defendants, AT T Inc. and AT T Pension Benefit Plan-Nonbargained Program.
STIPULATION RE: STAY OF PROCEEDINGS UNTIL COURT DECIDES DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO TRANSFER; ORDER RE: SAME
STIPULATION
Plaintiff Kathleen Stewart, appearing through her counsel of record, and defendants AT T Inc. and AT T Pension Benefit Plan-Nonbargained Program, appearing specially through their counsel of record, stipulate as follows:
1. This action was commenced in this Court on November 30, 2006. As part of its Initial Scheduling Order, this Court assigned the following dates to the action:
February 16, 2007: Last days for parties to meet and confer about initial disclosures, case management conference, ADR; last day for parties to file ADR certificates March 2, 2007: Last day for parties to complete initial disclosures, file case management conference statement and Rule 26(f) report March 9, 2007: Case management conference (2:00 p.m.) 2. The parties have stipulated that defendants have until February 2, 2007, by which to object to, answer, or otherwise respond to plaintiff's complaint.3. Defendants have informed plaintiff that they intend to bring a motion to transfer the action to the Western District of Texas pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1404(a). Defendants intend to file their motion on February 2, 2007. In order to accommodate the scheduling concerns of plaintiff's counsel, defendants will notice the motion for hearing on April 6, 2007, with the parties agreed that plaintiff's opposition to the motion will be filed on or before March 9, 2007, and defendants' reply in support of the motion will be filed on or before March 23, 2007.
4. Because a motion to transfer under 28 U.S.C. section 1404(a) is not a responsive pleading, defendants also intend to bring a motion to dismiss all or part of plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
5. After meeting and conferring about defendants' planned motions, the parties agree that it would be more efficient for the Court first to decide the motion to transfer, and then to entertain the motion to dismiss only if the action remains pending before the Court rather than being transferred to the Western District of Texas. The parties also agree that it would be more efficient if all case management-related activities, including the activities scheduled by the Court in its Initial Scheduling Order, take place only after the motion to dismiss is decided.
6. Accordingly, the parties request the Court to enter an order staying all proceedings in this action, including defendants' responsive pleading and the case management-related activities scheduled by the Court in its Initial Scheduling Order, other than briefing and hearing on defendants' motion to transfer, until such time as they are re-scheduled by this Court; except that if the motion to transfer is denied, then defendants will file their responsive pleading to plaintiff's complaint by not later than 20 days after notice of the Court's order denying the motion; and if the motion to transfer is granted, then defendants will file their responsive pleading to plaintiff's complaint by not later than 20 days after notice of the Judge of the Western District of Texas to whom the case is assigned.
7. By entering into this stipulation, plaintiff does not concede that any objection by defendants to this Court's venue over this action or to plaintiff's complaint has merit; and defendants do not (i) make a general appearance in this action; or (ii) waive any objection or defense to the Court's exercise of personal or subject matter jurisdiction over them or to plaintiff's complaint (other than an objection or defense based on service of process).
ORDER
On the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefor,IT IS ORDERED that all proceedings in this action, including defendants' responsive pleading and the case management-related activities scheduled by the Court in its Initial Scheduling Order, other than briefing and hearing on defendants' motion to transfer, be and are hereby STAYED until such time as they are re-scheduled by this Court if the motion to transfer is denied or by the Western District of Texas if the motion to transfer is granted; except that if the motion to transfer is denied, then defendants will file their responsive pleading to plaintiff's complaint by not later than 20 days after notice of the Court's order denying the motion; and if the motion to transfer is granted, then defendants will file their responsive pleading to plaintiff's complaint by not later than 20 days after notice of the Judge of the Western District of Texas to whom the case is assigned.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants will notice their motion to transfer, which they will file on February 2, 2007, for hearing on April 6, 2007, at 9:00 a.m., with plaintiff's opposition to the motion to be filed on or before March 9, 2007, and defendants' reply in support of the motion to be filed on or before March 23, 2007.