LADORE v. SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA, LLC

No. 3:14-CV-03530-EMC.

DOUGLAS LADORE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendant.

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

November 10, 2014.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Samuel Lasser , LAW OFFICE OF SAMUEL LASSER, San Francisco, CA, Jay Edelson* , Rafey S. Balabanian* , Benjamin S. Thomassen* , Amir Missaghi* , EDELSON PC, Chicago, Illinois, *Admitted Pro hac vice Attorneys for Plaintiff Douglas Ladore and the Putative Class.

LUANNE SACKS , MICHELE D. FLOYD , SACKS, RICKETTS & CASE LLP, San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Defendant SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA, LLC.


STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER MODIFYING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.

Pursuant to paragraph 4 of the Civil Standing Order for United States District Court Judge Edward M. Chen and Northern District Local Rule 6-2, the Parties hereto, through their respective counsel of record, stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Douglas Ladore ("Plaintiff") filed his Class Action Complaint on August 5, 2014 (Dkt. 1);

WHEREAS, Defendant Sony Computer Entertainment America, LLC ("Defendant") filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, supporting Memorandum, and Request for Judicial Notice on October 29, 2014 (Dkts. 30, 31);

WHEREAS, on November 3, 2014, the parties conferred and Plaintiff indicated that, due to the availability of counsel, he requires additional time to prepare and file his responses to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Request for Judicial Notice. The parties also agreed that scheduling issues pertaining to the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday necessitate further adjustments to the briefing and hearing schedule on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Request for Judicial Notice;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Request for Judicial Notice are presently due on November 12, 2014 and Defendant's reply in support of its Motion to Dismiss and Request for Judicial Notice is presently due on November 19, 2014 with a hearing scheduled on December 11, 2014 at 1:30 pm before Judge Edward M. Chen in Courtroom 5 on the 17th Floor of the United States Courthouse located at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102;

WHEREAS, the parties stipulate and agree to move the hearing date to accommodate modifications to the briefing schedule as follows:

STIPULATION

1. The parties, by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully request that the hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss be moved to December 18, 2014;

2. Plaintiff's time in which to file his Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Request for Judicial Notice be extended to November 26, 2014 to give Plaintiff sufficient time to fully consider and brief the issues raised by Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Request for Judicial Notice.

3. Defendant's time in which to file its reply be extended to December 10, 2014 to accommodate scheduling conflicts and the Thanksgiving holiday.

4. The dates requested in this stipulation will not interfere with any dates previously set by order of the Court.

5. All parties agree to the stipulation as indicated by their signatures below. The parties respectfully request that the Court approve the stipulation, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2 and enter an Order thereupon. A Proposed Order is filed herewith.

[PROPOSED ORDER]

The Court, having considered the above joint request and good cause appearing therefore, HEREBY ORDERS that:

The hearing of this matter will be held on December 18, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. Breifing shall proceed as follows:

Opposition: November 26, 2014; Reply: December 8, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Case Management Conference is reset from Nov. 20, 2014 to December 18, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. Joint CMC Statement due December 11, 2014.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases