Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05868/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05868-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed Question: Fed Communications Act of 1934

---

Proposed Order 

1

1 DEMETRIOS G. METROPOULOS 

2 MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP 

3 71 South Wacker Drive 

4 Chicago, Illinois 60606 

5 Telephone: (312) 782-0600 

6 Facsimile: (312) 701-7711 

7 Admitted Pro Hac Vice 

8 demetro@mayerbrown.com

9 

10 

11 JAMES B. YOUNG (Cal. Bar No. 46198) 

12 ED KOLTO (Cal. Bar No. 142793) 

13 ANNA KAPETANAKOS (Cal. Bar No. 179204) 

14 PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY 

15 d/b/a AT&T CALIFORNIA 

16 525 Market Street 

17 San Francisco, California 94105 

18 Telephone: (415) 778-1420 

19 Facsimile: (415) 974-5570 

20 Ek1942@att.com

21 

22 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

23 Pacific Bell Telephone Company 

24 d/b/a AT&T California 

25 

26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

27 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

28 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

29 

30 PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY ) Case No. C 06 5868 WHA 

31 d/b/a AT&T CALIFORNIA, a California ) 

32 corporation, ) PROPOSED ORDER 

33 ) GRANTING STIPULATION 

34 Plaintiff, ) TO ENLARGE ADR

35 ) DEADLINES BY ONE WEEK 

36 vs. ) 

37 )

38 THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES ) 

39 COMMISSION; MICHAEL R. PEEVEY, )

40 GEOFFREY F. BROWN, DIAN M. GRUENEICH, ) 

41 JOHN BOHN, and RACHELLE CHONG, in their ) 

42 official capacities as Commissioners of the Public ) 

43 Utilities Commission of the State of California, and ) 

44 not as individuals; and QWEST ) 

45 COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION and ) 

46 QWEST !NTERPRISE AMERICA, INC., ) 

47 ) 

48 Defendants. ) . 

49 __________________________________________)________________________________ 

Case 3:06-cv-05868-WHA Document 16 Filed 11/30/06 Page 1 of 3
Proposed Order 

2

1 This matter comes before the Court on the Stipulation of Plaintiff Pacific Bell Telephone 

2 Company (“AT&T California”) To Enlarge ADR Deadlines by One Week, to allow the parties to 

3 participate in a mediation before an Administrative Law Judge of the CPUC. Having fully 

4 considered the stipulation, and the parties’ agreement to that stipulation, the Court states as 

5 follows: 

6 1. The Stipulation is GRANTED. 

7 2. The parties shall file either a Stipulation to ADR Process or a Notice of Need for 

8 ADR Phone Conference on or before Thursday, December 7, 2006. 

9 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

10 Dated: ____________, 2006 _________________________________ 

11 WILLIAM ALSUP 

12 United States District Judge

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

November 30 .

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge William Alsup

Case 3:06-cv-05868-WHA Document 16 Filed 11/30/06 Page 2 of 3
Proposed Order 

3

1 Dated: November 29, 2006 

2 Respectfully submitted, 

3 By: /s/ Demetrios G. Metropoulos 

4 One of the Attorneys for 

5 Pacific Bell Telephone Company 

6 

7 Demetrios G. Metropoulos 

8 MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP 

9 71 South Wacker Drive 

10 Chicago, Illinois 60606 

11 Telephone: (312) 782-0600 

12 Facsimile: (312) 701-7711 

13 Admitted Pro Hac Vice 

14 demetro@mayerbrown.com

15 

16 

17 James B. Young (Cal. Bar No. 46198) 

18 Ed Kolto (Cal. Bar No. 142793) 

19 Anna Kapetanakos (Cal. Bar No. 179204) 

20 PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY 

21 d/b/a AT&T CALIFORNIA 

22 525 Market Street 

23 San Francisco, California 94105 

24 Telephone: (415) 778-1420 

25 Facsimile: (415) 974-5570 

26 Ek1942@att.com

27 

28 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

29 Pacific Bell Telephone Company 

30 d/b/a AT&T California 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

Case 3:06-cv-05868-WHA Document 16 Filed 11/30/06 Page 3 of 3