The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Conti N Samuel Senior U.S. District Court Judge
MICHAEL L. MALLOW (SBN 188745) firstname.lastname@example.org DENISE A. SMITH-MARS (SBN 215057) email@example.com 3 DARLENE M. CHO (SBN 251167) firstname.lastname@example.org 4 LOEB & LOEB LLP 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 2200 5 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: 310.282.2000 6 Facsimile: 310.282.2200 7 Attorneys for Defendant TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., 8 INC.
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST
AMENDED CLASS ACTION ) COMPLAINT; FOR ORDER
SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE; AND CONTINUING
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE AND
Complaint filed: May 24, 2012
Assigned to Hon. Samuel Conti
This stipulation is entered into by Toyota Motor Corporation ("TMC") and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. ("TMS") (collectively, "Toyota"), and Plaintiffs 3 Mui Ho, Shelda Anglin, and Ted Flory (collectively, "Plaintiffs") (collectively, the 4 "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel, with reference to the following 5 facts and recitals:
WHEREAS, on August 15, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Class 7 Action Complaint (the "FAC"), which, for the first time, named TMC as an 8 additional defendant in this action;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court's Order dated July 30, 2012, the
for TMS to respond to the FAC is September 14, 2012 [Docket #20];
WHEREAS, as of the date of this Stipulation, TMC has not been served with 12 the Summons and FAC in this action;
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that their preference is to have TMS and TMC 14 jointly file any response to the FAC;
WHEREAS, the case management conference in this action is currently 16 scheduled for December 7, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.; and
WHEREAS, no trial date has been set.
1. It is stipulated that TMC will be deemed to be served as of the date this Stipulation is filed with the Court. Notwithstanding the date on which service on TMC is deemed to have been effected, TMC shall file a response to Plaintiffs' FAC pursuant to paragraph 2 below.
2. The Parties hereby stipulate and agree, subject to Court approval, that 24 TMC and TMS shall have until October 12, 2012 to file a response to Plaintiffs' 25 FAC. To the extent TMC and TMS' response is a motion, the Parties agree to the 26 following briefing schedule, pursuant to the Commentary to Local Rule 7-2, which 27 states that "[f]or complex motions, parties are encouraged to stipulate to or seek a 28 Court order establishing a longer notice period with correspondingly longer periods for response or reply": Deadline for Defendants to file motion: Oct. 12, 2012 3 Deadline for Plaintiffs to file opposition: Nov. 12, 2012 4 Deadline for Defendants to file reply: Dec. 7, 2012 5 Hearing date on motion: The earlier of Dec. 21, 2012 or 6 the Court's next available 7 hearing date at the time the 8 hearing date is reserved by 9 Defendants
3. The Parties stipulate and agree, subject to Court approval, to the 11 following deadlines related to the Case Management Conference: 12 Deadline to hold Rule 26(f) conference: Jan. 7, 2013 13 Deadline to file ADR Certification: Jan. 7, 2013 14 Deadline to file ADR Stipulation or Request 15 for ADR Telephone Conference: Jan. 7, 2013 16 Deadline to file Joint Rule 26(f) Report / CMC Statement: Jan. 28, 2013 17 Deadline to serve Initial ...