Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05914/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05914-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CERTAIN DATES AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Thomas A. Kearney, State Bar No. 90045 

tak@kearneylittlefield.com 

Prescott W. Littlefield, State Bar No. 259049 

pwl@kearneylittlefield.com 

KEARNEY LITTLEFIELD LLP 

3436 N. Verdugo Rd., Ste. 230 

Glendale, CA 91208 

Telephone (213) 473-1900 

Facsimile (213) 473-1919 

Gene J. Stonebarger, State Bar No. 209461 

gstonebarger@stonebargerlaw.com 

Richard D. Lambert, State Bar No. 251148 

rlambert@stonebargerlaw.com 

STONEBARGER LAW 

A Professional Corporation 

75 Iron Point Circle, Suite 145 

Folsom, CA 95630 

Telephone (916) 235-7140 

Facsimile (916) 235-7141 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Mendez and the Class 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JAMIE MENDEZ, an individual, on behalf 

of herself and all others similarly situated 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

C-TWO GROUP, INC.; MOBILESOTRM, 

INC.; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 

 Defendants.

Case No.3:13-cv-05914-HSG

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE 

CERTAIN DATES AND ORDER 

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 96 Filed 12/28/15 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

-1- 

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CERTAIN DATES AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

 TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 

 Plaintiff Jamie Mendez and Defendants C-Two Group, Inc., and C & L Associates, Inc. 

(together with C-Two Group, “Defendants” and together with Plaintiff the “Parties”) by and 

through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 

 WHEREAS, pursuant to this Court’s Order, the Parties submitted a Joint Proposed Case 

Schedule on June 9, 2015; 

 WHEREAS, on June 15, 2015, the Court ordered, among other dates, the following dates: 

1) Rule 26 initial expert disclosures date is January 22, 2016; 

2) Rule 26 rebuttal expert disclosures date is February 19, 2016; 

3) And the Discovery cut off date for both fact and expert discovery is March 18, 2016; 

[Docket No. 78] 

WHEREAS, Defendants have moved for summary judgment, Plaintiff opposed, and the 

Court held a hearing on Defendants’ motions; 

WHEREAS, the Court has Ordered that Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification is 

granted, and Ordered the Parties to meet and confer to submit a stipulation regarding a notice 

procedure; 

WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred and concurrently herewith are submitting 

a stipulation regarding a notice procedure; 

WHEREAS, the Parties proposed notice procedure will likely take nearly 60 days from 

the date the Court accepts the Parties proposed notice procedure (with or without revisions to the 

proposal), including time for Defendants to provide a class list to the Claims Administrator; for 

the Claims Administrator to format the list and provide notice to the Class; and for Class 

Members to choose to opt-out or refrain from so doing; 

WHEREAS, the time for Class Members to opt-out will likely extend until the Parties’ 

previous proposed dates to close discovery and conduct expert discovery; 

WHEREAS, the Parties are desirous of waiting until the Court enters an Order regarding 

summary judgment so that they can assess the status of the case before engaging in any potential 

additional discovery, both fact and expert; 

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 96 Filed 12/28/15 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

-2- 

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CERTAIN DATES AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that the period of time for the Parties to complete 

discovery is continued as follows: 

1) Rule 26 initial expert disclosures date is 60 days after the Court’s Order regarding 

summary judgment is entered; 

2) Rule 26 rebuttal expert disclosures date is 90 days after the Court’s Order regarding 

summary judgment is entered; 

3) And the Discovery cut off date for both fact and expert discovery is 120 days after the 

Court’s Order regarding summary judgment is entered. 

Dated: December 28, 2015 KEARNEY LITTLEFIELD, LLP

 STONEBARGER LAW, APC

 By: /s/ Prescott W. Littlefield

 Prescott W. Littlefield

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Dated: December 28, 2015 WALSWORTH, FRANKLIN, BEVINS & 

 McCALL, LLP

 By: /s/ Laurie E. Sherwood

 LAURIE E. SHERWOOD

 ALEXANDER F. PEVZNER

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 C-TWO GROUP, INC. 

Dated: December 28, 2015 AKAWIE & LAPIETRA 

By: /s/ Gregory S. Nerland 

GREGORY S. NERLAND 

Attorneys for Defendant 

C&L ASSOCIATES, INC. 

I, Prescott W. Littlefield, hereby attest that pursuant to LR 5-1(i) I have on file concurrence 

for any signatures indicated by a “conformed” signature (/s/) within this e-filed document. 

/s/ Prescott W. Littlefield

Prescott W. Littlefield

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 96 Filed 12/28/15 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

P

D

URSUANT 

ated: Decem

STIPULATIO

TO STIPUL

mber 28, 20

 

 

 

ON TO CONTIN

LATION, IT

15 

-3-

NUE CERTAI

ORD

T IS SO ORD

-

IN DATES AN

DER

DERED. 

_______

Hon. Ha

United S

Northern

ND [PROPOSE

___________

ayward S. Gi

States Distric

n District of 

ED] ORDER 

__________

illiam Jr. 

ct Court Judg

California 

________ 

e 

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 96 Filed 12/28/15 Page 4 of 4