Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00313/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00313-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

CASE NO. 4:15cv00313-DMR – STIPULATION RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND 

MOTION TO STRIKE OPPOSITION DATE 

1

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 

Jeffrey B. Cereghino, SBN 099480 

Email: jbc@rocklawcal.com

Michael F. Ram, SBN 104805 

Email: mram@rocklawcal.com 

Susan Brown, SBN 287986

Email: sbrown@rocklawcal.com 

Matt Malone, SBN 221545

Email: mjm@rocklawcal.com

RAM, OLSON, CEREGHINO 

 & KOPCZYNSKI LLP 

555 Montgomery Street, Suite 820 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Telephone: (415) 433-4949 

Facsimile: (415) 433-7311 

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Proposed Class 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

EDD KING, DIEDRE KING, and ELMO 

SHEEN, on behalf of themselves and all 

others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NATIONAL GENERAL INSURANCE 

COMPANY, NATIONAL GENERAL 

ASSURANCE COMPANY, INTEGON 

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, 

INTEGON PREFERRED INSURANCE 

COMPANY, MIC GENERAL INSURANCE 

CORPORATION, PERSONAL EXPRESS 

INSURANCE COMPANY, SECURITY 

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, 

SEQUOIA INSURANCE COMPANY, 

and DOES1 through 200, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 4:15cv00313-DMR 

STIPULATION REGARDING 

PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSES TO 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO 

STRIKE PORTIONS OF AND 

MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST 

AMENDED COMPLAINT 

 

Case 4:15-cv-00313-DMR Document 46 Filed 05/06/15 Page 1 of 2 Case4:15-cv-00313-DMR Document45 Filed05/06/15 Page1 of 2
CASE NO. 4:15cv00313-DMR – STIPULATION RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND 

MOTION TO STRIKE OPPOSITION DATE 

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 

The parties, by their counsel, STIPULATE that Plaintiff shall have one additional week 

to file their response to Defendants’ motion to strike portions of and motion to dismiss 

Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, to and including May 15, 2015, provided that the Court 

does not reschedule the currently scheduled motion/CMC hearing on, currently scheduled for 

June 11, 2015. Defendants’ agreement as set forth above is conditioned on the Court not 

moving said date in light of the additional week extension agreed to by Defendants. 

Date: May 6, 2015 By: /s/ Jeffrey B. Cereghino

 Attorney for Plaintiffs and Proposed Class 

Date: May 6, 2015 By: /s/ Todd H. Stitt 

 Attorney for Defendants 

ORDER 

Good cause appearing, the Court agrees that Plaintiffs’ opposing brief(s) to Defendants’ 

motion to strike portions of and motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ first amended complaint shall be 

due on May 15, 2015. All scheduled court dates/hearings remain the same. 

Dated: _______ ___________________________________ 

 Hon. Judge Donna M. Ryu 

 

Case4:15-cv-00313-DMR Document45 Filed05/06/15 Page2 of 2

May 6, 2015 Defendants' reply shall be due on May 22, 2015.

Case 4:15-cv-00313-DMR Document 46 Filed 05/06/15 Page 2 of 2