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.

Kimberly Yordy, On Behalf of Herself and All v. Plimus

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


January 13, 2012

KIMBERLY YORDY, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL
OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFF,
v.
PLIMUS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, AND
GREAT HILL PARTNERS, LLC, A MASSACHUSETTS ACTION LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable Thelton E. Henderson

Sean P. Reis (SBN 184004) sreis@edelson.com 2 EDELSON MCGUIRE LLP 30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300 3 Rancho Santa Margarita, California 92688 Telephone: (949) 459-2124 4 Facsimile: (949) 459-2123 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff Kimberly Yordy 6 Nickolas A. Kacprowski (SBN 242684) nickolas.kacprowski@kirkland.com 7 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 555 California Street 8 San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: (415) 439-1400 9 Facsimile: (415) 439-1500 10 Attorneys for Defendants Plimus, Inc. and Great Hill Partners, LLC 11 [Additional counsel included in signature block.] 12

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE RELATED TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

Defendants Plimus, Inc. ("Plimus") and Great Hill Partners, LLC ("Great Hill") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree to extend the 4 briefing schedule on Defendants' pending motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. In support of the 5 instant stipulation, the Parties state as follows: 6 (the "Complaint") against Plimus and Great Hill, (Dkt. No. 1); Complaint in its entirety, (Dkt. No. 29); 1011 motion; 12 Defendants' motion; 14 15 prepare a response to Defendants' motion, and have agreed that she may have an extension of time 16 through and including March 23, 2012, to file her opposition to the motion; 17 18 opposition, Defendants shall have through and including April 6, 2012, to reply in support of their 19 motion; 20 21 extensions are not sought for any improper purpose; 22 23 24 file her response to Defendants' pending motion to dismiss the Complaint; 25 26 of their motion to dismiss the Complaint; and, 27 28

STIPULATION EXTENDING 1 CASE NO. 12-CV-00229-TEH BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-12 and this Court's Standing Order, Plaintiff Kimberly Yordy and

WHEREAS, on January 13, 2012, Plaintiff Yordy filed her putative class action complaint

WHEREAS, on March 2, 2012, Plimus and Great Hill jointly moved to dismiss the

WHEREAS, Plaintiff is currently reviewing the arguments made in Defendants' pending

WHEREAS, Plaintiff requires additional time to prepare an adequate response to

WHEREAS, the Parties have conferred regarding Plaintiff's need for additional time to

WHEREAS, the Parties have further agreed that following the filing of Plaintiff's

WHEREAS, good cause exists for the extensions of time contemplated herein and such

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED:

1. Plaintiff shall have an extension of time through and including March 23, 2012, to

2. Defendants shall have through and including April 6, 2012, to file a reply in support

3. All other briefing deadlines with respect to Defendants' pending motion to dismiss

2 the Complaint are hereby vacated. 3

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 03/16/2012

HONORABLE THELTON E. HENDERSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20120113

© 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.