Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05341/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05341-11/pdf.json

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

---

Case No. C 09-05341 JF – STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE 

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 

28 

Michael F. Ram (SBN 104805) 

RAM & OLSON 

555 Montgomery Street, Suite 820 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Telephone: (415) 433-4949 

Facsimile: (415) 433-7311 

Email: mram@ramolson.com

Oren S. Giskan 

Catherine E. Anderson

GISKAN SOLOTAROFF 

ANDERSON & STEWART, LLP 

11 Broadway, Suite 2150 

New York, NY 10004 

Telephone: (212) 847-8315 

Facsimile: (646) 520-3237 

Email: ogiskan@gslawny.com 

Marc H. Edelson 

EDELSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC 

45 W. Court Street 

Doylestown, PA 18901 

Telephone: (215) 230-8043 

Facsimile: (215) 230-8735 

Email: medelson@edelson-law.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

(SAN JOSE DIVISION) 

MICHAEL A. KENT, DANIEL 

JOHANNING, AND JAKUB CMIRAL, individually and on behalf of all those 

similarly situated, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, a 

Delaware corporation, 

 Defendant. 

CASE NO. C 09-05341 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED 

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND 

MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ACTION 

ALLEGATIONS 

**E-Filed 1/5/2011**

------------------

Case 3:09-cv-05341-WHA Document 74 Filed 01/05/11 Page 1 of 3
Case No. C 09-05341 JF – STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE 

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 

28 

WHEREAS, on July 6, 2010, the Court granted in part, and denied in part, Defendant 

Hewlett-Packard Company’s (“HP”) Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action 

Complaint with leave to re-plead; 

WHEREAS, on September 24, 2010, Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Class Action 

Complaint for Damages, Restitution and Injunctive Relief; 

WHEREAS, on November 19, 2010, HP filed its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second 

Amended Class Action Complaint and a separate Motion to Strike Class Allegations From 

Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, with the motion hearings scheduled before Judge Fogel 

on January 21, 2010, at 9:00 a.m.; 

WHEREAS, on December 14, 2010, HP filed its memorandum of law in opposition to 

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Discovery from HP; 

WHEREAS, the Court has ordered a Settlement Conference before Magistrate Judge 

Howard R. Lloyd on January 26, 2011; 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 3:09-cv-05341-WHA Document 74 Filed 01/05/11 Page 2 of 3
Case No. C 09-05341 JF – STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO STRIKE 

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 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective 

counsel, that: 

1. The hearing of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Class 

Action Complaint and Motion to Strike Class Allegations From Plaintiffs’ Second Amended 

Complaint shall be continued until March 4, 2011; 

2. Plaintiffs will not seek additional discovery from Defendant HP, other than the 

discovery sought in Plaintiffs’ Motion To Compel filed November 30, 2010, or which otherwise 

may be necessary to confirm the terms of any settlement agreement which may be reached, prior 

to a ruling on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Class Action 

Complaint, Defendants’ Motion to Strike Class Allegations From Plaintiffs’ Second Amended 

Complaint, and Plaintiffs’ Motion To Compel Discovery from Defendant HP. 

3. Plaintiffs shall file any opposition briefs to HP’s Motion to Dismiss and HP’s 

Motion to Strike on or before February 4, 2011. HP shall file any reply briefs in support of its 

respective motions on or before February 18, 2011. 

Dated: December 17, 2010 By: /s/ Samuel G. Liversidge

 Samuel G. Liversidge 

 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

Attorneys for Defendant, 

 Hewlett-Packard Co. 

Dated: December 17, 2010 By: /s/ Michael F. Ram 

 Michael F. Ram 

 RAM & OLSON LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

 The Honorable Jeremy Fogel 

 United States District Court Judge 

1/5/2011

Case 3:09-cv-05341-WHA Document 74 Filed 01/05/11 Page 3 of 3