Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Lindsay Padilla, Eliezer Pilowsky, and v. Carrier Iq

January 4, 2012

LINDSAY PADILLA, ELIEZER PILOWSKY, AND STEVEN WATTS, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CARRIER IQ, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, AND DOES 1 TO 10, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Edward J. Davila United States District Judge

STIPULATION RE CONTINUANCE OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

WHEREAS the above-referenced plaintiffs filed the above-captioned case;

WHEREAS the above-referenced plaintiffs allege violations of the Federal Wiretap Act 25 and other laws by the defendants in this case; 26

WHEREAS over 50 other complaints have been filed to-date in federal district courts 27 throughout the United States by plaintiffs purporting to bring class actions on behalf of cellular 28 telephone and other device users on whose devices software made by defendant Carrier IQ, Inc. is

or has been embedded (collectively, including the above-captioned matter, the "CIQ cases"); 2

3 transfer the CIQ cases to this jurisdiction for coordinated and consolidated pretrial proceedings 4 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1407, and responses to the motion supporting coordination or 5 consolidation have been filed; 6

7 complaints in the CIQ cases; 8

9 any response to the pleadings in the CIQ cases would be more efficient for the parties and for the 10

WHEREAS plaintiffs agree that the deadline for defendant Carrier IQ to answer, move, or

12 otherwise respond to their complaint shall be extended until the earliest of the following dates: (1)

forty-five days after the filing of a consolidated amended complaint in the CIQ cases; or (2) forty- five days after plaintiffs provide written notice to defendants that plaintiffs do not intend to file a

consolidated amended complaint; or (3) as otherwise ordered by this Court or the MDL transferee

court; provided, however, that in the event that Carrier IQ should agree to an earlier response date 17 or if otherwise required to respond at an earlier date in any of these cases, Carrier IQ will respond 18 to the complaint in the above-captioned action on that earlier date; 19

20 stipulation with counsel for plaintiffs, to all named defendants who notify plaintiffs in writing of 21 their intention to join this Stipulation; 22

23 including but not limited to the defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction, subject matter 24 jurisdiction, improper venue, sufficiency ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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