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.

Baker-Rhett v. Aspiro AB

United States District Court, N.D. California, Oakland Division

July 6, 2016

JUSTIN BAKER-RHETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
ASPIRO AB, a Swedish limited liability company, and KANYE WEST, an individual, together d/b/a TIDAL, Defendants.

          Justin Baker-Rhett, Plaintiff, represented by Todd M. Logan, Edelson PC.

          Kanye West, doing business as Tidal, Defendant, represented by Andrew H. Bart, Jenner & Block LLP.

          Kanye West, Defendant, represented by Kenneth Kiyul Lee, Jenner & Block LLP & Christina Avedissian, Jenner and Block LLP.

          Aspiro AB, Defendant, represented by Ashley Lynn Shively, Reed Smith LLP, Robert D. Phillips, Jr., Reed Smith LLP & Thomas A. Evans, Reed Smith LLP.

          STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANT ASPIRO AB'S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO DISMISS. [Local Rule 6-2]

          JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge.

         Pursuant to Paragraph 4 of the Judge White's Standing Civil Orders and Northern District Local Rule 6-2, Justin Baker-Rhett ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Aspiro AB ("Aspiro") by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby respectfully stipulate and agree, subject to Court approval, to (1) extend Plaintiff's deadline to respond to Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue, or in the Alternative Motion to Dismiss, from July 5, 2016 to July 19, 2016, and (2) extend Defendant's deadline to reply to Plaintiff's response from July 12, 2016 to July 26, 2016. In support of this Stipulation, the Plaintiff and Defendant Aspiro AB state as follows:

         WHEREAS, Defendant filed its Motion to Transfer Venue or, in the Alternative, Motion to Dismiss on June 20, 2016;

         WHEREAS, Plaintiff believes it would be an inefficient use of the Court's and the Parties' resources to fully brief and argue Defendant's motion, believes that the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is an acceptable venue for his claims, and would prefer to focus on the merits of his case as quickly as possible;

         WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiff conferred with counsel for Defendant Aspiro AB on June 30, 2016 and July 5, 2016, to discuss the possibility of a stipulated transfer of venue;

         WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendant Aspiro AB believe that a two-week extension of the briefing schedule on Defendant Aspiro AB's pending Motion will allow all Parties to come to a stipulated agreement regarding the appropriate venue (or venues) for this lawsuit;

         WHEREAS, just two other time modifications have been made in this case: first, Defendants' time to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Corrected First Amended Class Action Complaint ("Complaint") was extended from May 29, 2016 to June 20, 2016 (dkt. 10), and, second, Defendant Kanye West's deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint was again extended from June 20, 2016 to July 6, 2016, (dkt. 17);

         WHEREAS, this proposed change will not alter the date of any other event or any deadline already fixed by Court order;

         NOW THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant Aspiro AB hereby STIPULATE and AGREE as ...


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.