Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Arabella Lemus, Malvin A. Ayala As Individuals v. H&R Block Enterprises

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 9, 2011

ARABELLA LEMUS, MALVIN A. AYALA AS INDIVIDUALS AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
H&R BLOCK ENTERPRISES, LLC FKA H&R BLOCK ENTERPRISES, INC., A MISSOURI CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Susan Illston

*Additional plaintiffs' counsel on following page

JOINT STIPULATION FOR TO CONTINUE HEARING ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

CLASS ACTION

ADDITIONAL PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL

3 the parties' cross motions for summary judgment / adjudication, or in the alternative, if the parties 4 reached a settlement of this matter, for preliminary approval of the settlement agreement. The parties 5 are pleased to inform the Court that they have recently finalized and executed a settlement agreement 6 and request that the Court take off calendar the parties' cross motions and continue the hearing for 7 preliminary approval of the settlement to February 10, 2012, or a date thereafter that is convenient for 8 the Court. 9

10 hearing date: 11

12 prepare the motion for preliminary approval; 13

3. Defendant anticipates that the preliminary approval hearing could generate questions from

15 its tax preparers. Defendant wants to ensure that there is sufficient time to put a communication plan in 16 place alerting its managers that a settlement has been reached and instructing its managers on the 17 appropriate manner in which to deal with such questions (i.e. - to not substantively discuss the terms of 18 the settlement with tax preparers, or to say anything which might encourage or discourage tax preparers 19 from participating in the settlement). Moreover, Defendant believes that its managers would be best 20 equipped to deal with such questions outside of the busiest part of its tax season. . 21

22 final approval of the settlement which contemplates a preliminary approval hearing in early February 23 and so no undue delay will be caused by the parties' request for a short continuance of the preliminary 24 approval hearing. 25

2012, is an available date on the Court's calendar. 27

The undersigned counsel of record hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

At the last case management conference, the Court set a hearing date of January 13, 2012, on

There are several reasons underlying the parties' request to continue the preliminary approval

1. The parties have just finalized and executed the settlement documents and now need to

2. The busiest part of Defendant's tax season occurs between mid January and early February.

4. The parties have agreed upon a schedule for dissemination of the notice to the class and

5. The parties have contacted the Court's clerk, who has informed counsel that February 10,

It is therefore stipulated as follows:

1. The cross motions for summary judgment/adjudication are hereby withdrawn by the parties;

2. The motion for preliminary approval of the settlement be continued until February 10, 2012, or a date thereafter that is convenient for the Court.

DATED: January 6, 2012 MARLIN & SALTZMAN, LLP By: /s/ Louis M. Marlin LouisM.Marlin Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Plaintiff Class DATED: January 6, 2012 SEYFARTH SHAW, LLP By: /s/ Andrew M. Paley Andrew M Paley Attorneys for Defendants

IT IS SO ORDERED: 14 15

Hon. Susan Illston United States District Judge

20110109

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.