Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00392/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00392-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 15:2(a) Fair Labor Standards Act

---

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 & ORDER EXTENDING TIME 

TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP 

J. AL LATHAM, JR. (SB# 71605) 

THOMAS E. GEIDT (SB# 80955) 

ANNE NERGAARD (SB# 235058) 

55 Second Street 

Twenty-Fourth Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Telephone: (415) 856-7000 

Facsimile: (415) 856-7100 

Attorneys for Defendant 

AT&T, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

YELENA LEBEDCHIK, ERIC HOOKS, 

SVETLANA MELNIK, individually and 

on behalf of others similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

AT&T, INC., a Delaware corporation and 

SBC COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a 

Delaware corporation, 

Defendants. 

CASE NO. 2:07-CV-00392-FCD (EFB) 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT 

AT&T, INC. TO ANSWER OR RESPOND 

TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

STIPULATION

 The parties, by their undersigned counsel, stipulate and agree as follows: 

 1. Plaintiffs served their First Amended Complaint on Defendant AT&T, Inc. on 

June 27, 2007. 

 2. The parties previously stipulated and agreed, pursuant to Local Rule 6-144, that 

Defendant AT&T, Inc. could have an initial 30-day extension of time to answer or respond to the 

Complaint, from July 17 to August 16, 2007, to give the parties time to discuss, among other 

things, which AT&T-affiliated entity or entities should appropriately be named as defendants in 

this action. 

Case 2:07-cv-00392-FCD-EFB Document 16 Filed 08/20/07 Page 1 of 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 

-2- 

STIPULATION & ORDER EXTENDING TIME 

TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

 3. Counsel for the parties have entered into discussions and exchanged information 

concerning whether AT&T, Inc. is a cognizable entity over which this Court has jurisdiction, or 

whether instead another AT&T-affiliated entity or entities should be substituted in as the proper 

defendant(s) in this action. The parties need some additional time to evaluate and attempt to 

agree upon this issue and thereby avoid a motion to quash service of summons. 

 4. Accordingly, the parties have agreed that Defendant AT&T, Inc. may have a 30-

day extension of time, from August 16 to September 17, 2007, to answer or respond to the First 

Amended Complaint, and the parties request the Court’s approval of this Stipulation. 

DATED: August 17, 2007 SHEA LAW OFFICES 

LAW OFFICES OF ILONA BRUSIL 

KERSHAW, CUTTER & RATINOFF 

By: /s/ Mary J. Shea

MARY J. SHEA 

Attorneys for Plaintiff YELENA LEBEDCHIK, et. al. 

DATED: August 17, 2007 PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER, LLP 

By: /s/ Thomas E. Geidt

THOMAS E. GEIDT 

Attorneys for Defendant AT&T, INC. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: August 20, 2007 

Case 2:07-cv-00392-FCD-EFB Document 16 Filed 08/20/07 Page 2 of 2