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.

Troy Kool, Individually and On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Target Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 13, 2011

TROY KOOL, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
TARGET CORPORATION, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION AND DOES 1-100, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE HEARING DATES

Plaintiff Troy Kool and defendant Target Corporation ("Target"), acting through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. On November 17, 2010, Target filed its Motion to Dismiss, Stay, or Transfer This Action on Account of Previously-Filed Class Action; or Alternatively, to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a); or Alternatively, to Stay Action Pending Outcome of Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court (the "Motion to Dismiss") (Docket No. 9). The hearing on the Motion to Dismiss was noticed for December 20, 2010.

2. Plaintiff filed his opposition to the Motion to Dismiss on December 6, 2010 (Docket No. 15). Target filed its reply in support of the Motion to Dismiss on December 13, 2010 (Docket No. 17).

3. On December 8, 2010, the Court sua sponte continued the hearing on Target's motion to dismiss to January 18, 2011. (Docket No. 16.)

4. Pursuant to the Court's November 2, 2010, order (Docket No. 7), the parties were also scheduled to appear on January 24, 2011, for the initial status conference.

5. On January 7, 2011, the parties stipulated to continue the hearing on Target's motion to dismiss and the pre-trial scheduling conference to April 14, 2011, and April 25, 2011, respectively (Docket No. 19). The parties requested the continuance based on the mediation in this action and in the pending related action, Mesindo Pompa, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Target Corporation, and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, U.S.D.C., C.D. Cal., No. CV 10-0634 AHM (FFMx) ("Pompa"). On January 10, 2011, the Court otherwise granted the parties' stipulation, but continued the hearing on Target's motion to dismiss to April 11, 2011. (Docket No. 20.)

6. On April 4, 2011, the Court sua sponte further continued the hearing on Target's motion to dismiss to April 25, 2011. (Docket Nos. 21, 22.)

7. The parties report that they have reached a resolution of this action and the related Pompa action, and anticipate filing their settlement papers with the court in Pompa within the next month. As part of that settlement, this action will be dismissed. To help facilitate the settlement and avoid what may become unnecessary time and expense for the parties and the Court, the parties request that the April 25, 2011, hearing on Target's motion to dismiss and the April 25, 2011, status conference both be vacated.

8. The parties further request that the Court stay this action for all purposes pending the parties' settlement. The parties will report back to the Court on the progress of the settlement approval process as it proceeds.

Dated: April 13, 2011. GENE J. STONEBARGER RICHARD D. LAMBERT STONEBARGER LAW JAMES R. PATTERSON ALISA A. MARTIN HARRISON PATTERSON & O'CONNOR LLP By:/s/Richard D. Lambert (as authorized 4/13/11) Richard D. Lambert Attorneys for Plaintiff Troy Kool and the Proposed Class Dated: April 13, 2011. JEFFREY D. WOHL RISHI N. SHARMA JENNIFER L. ROTH PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP By:/s/Rishi N. Sharma Rishi N. Sharma Attorneys for Defendant Target Corporation

ORDER

On the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS ORDERED:

1. The April 25, 2011, hearing on defendant Target Corporation's Motion to Dismiss, Stay, or Transfer This Action on Account of Previously-Filed Class Action; or Alternatively, to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a); or Alternatively, to Stay Action Pending Outcome of Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court (Docket No. 9) is vacated.

2. The April 25, 2011, initial status conference also is vacated.

3. The action is stayed for all purposes pending final resolution of the parties' settlement.

4. The parties are directed to report back to the Court on the progress of the settlement approval process as it proceeds before the court in Mesindo Pompa, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Target Corporation, and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, U.S.D.C., C.D. Cal., No. CV 10-0634 AHM (FFMx), with the understanding that dismissal of this action will be part of settlement once approved.

20110413

© 1992-2011 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.