Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00935/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00935-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

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

30376437.1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:16-cv-00935-RS

GLENN D. POMERANTZ (SBN 112503)

glenn.pomerantz@mto.com

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

355 South Grand Avenue, Thirty-Fifth Floor

Los Angeles, California 90071-1560

Telephone: (213) 683-9100

Facsimile: (213) 687-3702

KELLY M. KLAUS (SBN 161091)

kelly.klaus@mto.com

ACHYUT J. PHADKE (SBN 261567)

achyut.phadke@mto.com

ADAM I. KAPLAN (SBN 268182)

adam.kaplan@mto.com

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

560 Mission Street, Twenty-Seventh Floor

San Francisco, California 94105-2907

Telephone: (415) 512-4000

Facsimile: (415) 512-4077

Attorneys for Defendants Motion Picture

Association of America, Inc., Walt Disney

Studios Motion Pictures, Paramount Pictures

Corporation, Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc.,

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation,

Universal City Studios LLC, and Warner Bros.

Entertainment Inc.

K. LEE MARSHALL (SBN 277092)

klmarshall@bryancave.com

ROGER MYERS (SBN 146164)

roger.myers@bryancave.com

ALEXANDRA WHITWORTH (SBN 303046)

alex.whitworth@bryancave.com

BRYAN CAVE LLP

560 Mission Street, 25th Floor

San Francisco, California 94105

Tel: (415) 675-3400 /Fax: (415) 675-3434

Attorneys for Defendant National Association

of Theatre Owners

DAVID SCHACHMAN (Pro Hac Vice)

ds@schachmanlaw.com

LAW OFFICES OF DAVID SCHACHMAN,

P.C.

55 West Monroe Street, Suite 2970

Chicago, Illinois 60603

Tel: (312) 427-9500/Fax: (312) 268-2425

Attorneys for Plaintiff Timothy Forsyth

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIMOTHY FORSYTH, individually and on behalf of a

class of similarly situated individuals,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF

AMERICA, INC., WALT DISNEY STUDIOS

MOTION PICTURES, PARAMOUNT

PICTURES CORPORATION, SONY

PICTURES ENTERTAINMENT INC.,

TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM

CORPORATION, UNIVERSAL CITY

STUDIOS LLC, WARNER BROS.

ENTERTAINMENT INC., and NATIONAL

ASSOCIATION OF THEATRE OWNERS,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:16-cv-00935-RS

STIPULATION AND

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE

[1] DEFENDANTS’ REPLY IN

SUPPORT OF SPECIAL

MOTION TO STRIKE

PLAINTIFFS’ ACTION

PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA’S

ANTI-SLAPP STATUTE AND

MOTION TO DISMISS, AND

[2] HEARING DATE FOR

SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE

Judge: Hon. Richard Seeborg

Case 3:16-cv-00935-RS Document 47 Filed 08/09/16 Page 1 of 4
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

30376437.1 -1-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:16-cv-00935-RS

In support of their joint stipulation regarding the hearing on and reply brief in support of

Defendants’ special motion to strike and motion to dismiss, Plaintiff Timothy Forsyth and

Defendants Motion Picture Association of America Inc., Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures,

Paramount Pictures Corporation, Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film

Corporation, Universal City Studios LLC, Warner Brothers Entertainment Inc., and the National

Association of Theatre Owners, by and through their undersigned counsel of record, recite as

follows:

A. On April 29, 2016, Defendants filed joint motions to strike Plaintiff’s entire action

pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP statute, in Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16, and to dismiss

Plaintiff’s entire action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and Defendant

National Association of Theater Owners filed a supplemental brief in support of same.

B. Pursuant to the parties’ May 15, 2016 stipulation (ECF No. 39), and the Court’s May

17, 2016 order approving that stipulation (ECF No. 40), Plaintiff’s Opposition brief was due on or

before July 15, 2016, and was not to exceed 40 pages of text (rather than the 25-page limit under

the local rules).

C. Also pursuant to the parties’ May 15, 2016 stipulation, the parties agreed that,

following the filing of Plaintiff’s Opposition, the parties would meet and confer regarding the date

by which Defendants would file their Reply brief(s), the page limit for the Reply brief(s), and a

hearing date for the motions. The parties agreed in the stipulation that they would propose a

hearing date no earlier than three weeks after the filing of the Reply brief(s).

D. The parties met and conferred by telephone and email regarding these issues over

several days, and agreed that Defendants’ deadline to file a Reply in support of their motion to

strike and motion to dismiss should be September 15, 2016. The additional time is necessary

based on (i) the number of issues that Defendants are required to address in replying to Plaintiff’s

Opposition and (ii) Defendants’ counsel’s work and vacation schedules in August. Upon

reviewing the Court’s calendar, the parties also agreed that October 27, 2016, was the most

mutually convenient available hearing date. This date was selected because all parties are

available on that date, and the Court is not available on October 6 and 20. The parties further

Case 3:16-cv-00935-RS Document 47 Filed 08/09/16 Page 2 of 4
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

30376437.1 -2-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:16-cv-00935-RS

agreed that, in order to address Plaintiff’s Opposition, Defendants’ Reply brief(s) should be

allowed to exceed the 15-page limit set by local rules, but shall not exceed 25 pages of text. While

the Defendants will endeavor to file a single Reply brief, to the extent that they file more than one

brief, the collective pages will not exceed 25.

E. The parties also conferred and agreed that, for the sake of efficiency, the upcoming case

management conference should be continued to the same date and time as the hearing on

Defendants’ motion to strike and motion to dismiss. The case management conference is currently

scheduled for September 22, 2016. (ECF No. 41.)

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate that, subject to the Court’s approval:

1. Defendants’ special motion to strike Plaintiff’s action pursuant to California’s antiSLAPP statute, in Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16, and Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s

action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), will be heard on October 27, 2016, at

1:30 p.m.;

2. Defendants’ Reply brief(s) is due on or before September 15, 2016, and shall not

exceed 25 combined pages of text (exclusive of caption page and tables);

3. The case management conference currently scheduled for September 22, 2016, shall be

continued to October 27, 2016, at 1:30 p.m.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: July 29, 2016 LAW OFFICES OF DAVID SCHACHMAN, P.C.

By: /s/ David Schachman

DAVID SCHACHMAN

Attorneys for Plaintiff Timothy Forsyth

Case 3:16-cv-00935-RS Document 47 Filed 08/09/16 Page 3 of 4
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

30376437.1 -3-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:16-cv-00935-RS

DATED: July 29, 2016 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

By: /s/ Kelly M. Klaus

KELLY M. KLAUS

Attorneys for Defendants Motion Picture Association of

America, Inc., Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures,

Paramount Pictures Corporation, Sony Pictures

Entertainment Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film

Corporation, Universal City Studios LLC, and Warner

Bros. Entertainment Inc.

DATED: July 29, 2016 BRYAN CAVE LLP

By: /s/ K. Lee Marshall

K. LEE MARSHALL

Attorneys for Defendant National Association of

Theatre Owners

THE COURT FINDS GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION AND ON

THAT BASIS THE FOREGOING STIPULATION IS APPROVED AND IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _______________

HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8/8/16

Case 3:16-cv-00935-RS Document 47 Filed 08/09/16 Page 4 of 4