Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03961/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03961-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[Proposed] ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES.

Copple v. Astrella & Rice, P.C., et al.; Case No. C 05 3961 JSW

ETHAN P. SCHULMAN [Calif. SBN 112466] 

HOWARD RICE NEMEROVSKI CANADY

 FALK & RABKIN

A Professional Corporation

Three Embarcadero Center, 7 Floor th

San Francisco, California 94111

Telephone: (415) 434-1600

Facsimile: (415) 217-5910

Attorneys for Class Counsel Defendants

JOSEPH WOOD [Calif. SBN 103596]

425 California Street, Nineteenth Floor

San Francisco, California 94104

Telephone: (415) 310-5692

Facsimile: (415) 391-7979

Attorney for Plaintiff, Robert W. Copple,

on behalf of himself and of all others

similarly situated

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT W. COPPLE, Case No. C 05 3961 JSW

on behalf of himself and of

all others similarly situated, [Proposed] ORDER 

 RE DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST 

Plaintiff, FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES

vs. 

 

ASTRELLA & RICE, P.C.; BAKER, 

BURTON & LUNDY, P.C.; 

ENGSTROM, LIPSCOMB & LACK; 

GIRARDI & KEESE; J. TYNAN KELLY; 

KIESEL, BOUCHER & LARSON, LLP; 

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN &

BERNSTEIN, LLP; M. BRIAN 

McMAHON; O’DONNELL & SHAEFFER,

LLP; MICHAEL J. PONCE; FRANCIS O. 

SCARPULLA; and DOUGLAS A. 

STACEY,

Defendants. 

_____________________________________/

 

Case 3:05-cv-03961-JSW Document 69 Filed 08/29/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[Proposed] ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES.

Copple v. Astrella & Rice, P.C., et al.; Case No. C 05 3961 JSW 1

Pursuant to the request of the parties, and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: (1) that the date for either submission by the parties

of a stipulation as to the amount of attorney’s fees to be awarded to defendants pursuant to

the Court’s August 9, 2006 order granting in part and denying in part defendants’ motion

for Rule 11 sanctions, or submission by defendants of a revised declaration in support of

such fees, shall be extended to September 11, 2006; and (2) if such a revised declaration is

submitted, plaintiff shall have until September 21, 2006 to submit a response thereto.

DATED: August ____, 2006

___________________________

United States District Judge

29

Case 3:05-cv-03961-JSW Document 69 Filed 08/29/06 Page 2 of 2