Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-02252/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-02252-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination

---

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 

 1 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT

CASE NO.: C 01-2252-CRB 

Gibson, Dunn & 

Crutcher LLP 

Brad Seligman (SBN 083838) 

Jocelyn D. Larkin (SBN 110817) 

THE IMPACT FUND 

125 University Avenue 

Berkeley, CA 94710 

Telephone: 510.845.3473 

Facsimile: 510.845.3654 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. (SBN 132099) 

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

333 South Grand Avenue 

Los Angeles, CA 90071 

Telephone: 213.229.7000 

Facsimile: 213.229.7520 

TBoutrous@gibsondunn.com 

Attorney for Defendant

Joseph M. Sellers

Christine E. Webber 

Jenny R. Yang 

COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL 

PLLC 

West Tower, Suite 500 

1100 New York Avenue 

Washington, DC 20005 

Telephone: 202.408.4600 

Facsimile: 202.408.4699 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

BETTY DUKES, PATRICIA SURGESON, 

EDITH ARANA, DEBORAH GUNTER and 

CHRISTINE KWAPNOSKI, on behalf of 

themselves and all others similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

WAL-MART STORES, INC., 

Defendant. 

CASE NO.: C 01-2252-CRB 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS 

FOR MOTION TO DISMISS FOURTH 

AMENDED COMPLAINT 

The undersigned counsel, on behalf of Betty Dukes, Patricia Surgeson, Edith Arana, Deborah 

Gunter, and Christine Kwapnoski (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”), 

hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

WHEREAS, Wal-Mart intends to respond to the Fourth Amended Complaint by filing a 

Motion to Dismiss or Strike; 

Case 3:01-cv-02252-CRB Document 777 Filed 12/09/11 Page 1 of 3 Case3:01-cv-02252-CRB Document776 Filed12/01/11 Page1 of 3
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 

 2 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT

CASE NO.: C 01-2252-CRB 

Gibson, Dunn & 

Crutcher LLP 

WHEREAS, because of the nature and posture of this case Wal-Mart contends that there are 

an unusual number of issues subject to a Rule 12(b)(6) motion that warrant briefing, including the 

impact of the Supreme Court’s decision; 

WHEREAS, this Court’s standing order limits motions to dismiss to 15 pages; 

WHEREAS, the parties agree that additional briefing would likely benefit the Court and the 

judicial system by allowing the parties to adequately articulate their positions on the preliminary 

issues at this stage of this case; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart have reached an agreement, subject to the Court’s 

approval, extending the page limits for the briefing on Wal-Mart’s anticipated Motion to Dismiss or 

Strike the Fourth Amended Complaint; 

THEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart stipulate and agree as follows: 

1. Wal-Mart’s Motion to Dismiss or Strike the Fourth Amended Complaint shall not 

exceed 35 pages; 

2 Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Wal-Mart’s Motion shall not exceed 45 pages; 

3. Wal-Mart’s Reply to Plaintiffs’ Opposition, if any, shall not exceed 15 pages. 

Dated: December 1, 2011 

By: /s/ Brad Seligman _ By: /s/ Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. 

Brad Seligman (SBN 083838) Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. (SBN 132099) 

Jocelyn D. Larkin (SBN 110817) GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

THE IMPACT FUND 333 South Grand Avenue 

125 University Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90071 

Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: 213.229.7000 

Telephone: 510.845.3473 Facsimile: 213.229.7520 

Facsimile: 510.845.3654 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Attorney for Defendant 

I, Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., attest that 

concurrence in the filing of this document 

has been obtained from the other signatory.

 

Case 3:01-cv-02252-CRB Document 777 Filed 12/09/11 Page 2 of 3 Case3:01-cv-02252-CRB Document776 Filed12/01/11 Page2 of 3
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 

 3 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PAGE LIMITS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT

CASE NO.: C 01-2252-CRB 

Gibson, Dunn & 

Crutcher LLP 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 

 

 DATE: 

 ___________________________ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

CHARLES R. BREYER 

Case3:01-cv-02252-CRB Document776 Filed12/01/11 Page3 of 3

December 8, 2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:01-cv-02252-CRB Document 777 Filed 12/09/11 Page 3 of 3