Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03072/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03072-4/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT 

ON REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

CV 13-3072-EMC 

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 

RANDALL W. EDWARDS (S.B. #179053) 

redwards@omm.com 

KEVIN R. RUBINO (S.B. #255677) 

krubino@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111-3823 

Telephone: (415) 984-8700 

Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 

BRIAN C. ANDERSON (S.B. # 126539) 

banderson@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

1625 Eye Street, NW 

Washington, D.C. 20006-4001 

Tеlephone: (202) 383-5300 

Facsimile: (202) 383-5414 

Attorneys for Defendant Ford Motor Company 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

In re: 

MYFORD TOUCH CONSUMER 

LITIGATION 

Case No. 3:13-CV-3072-EMC 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT FOR FORD 

MOTOR COMPANY’S REPLY IN 

SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

[N.D. CAL. L.R. 7-11] 

Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen 

Case 3:13-cv-03072-EMC Document 74 Filed 03/14/14 Page 1 of 5
- 1 - 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT 

ON REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

CV 13-3072-EMC 

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 EXTENDING PAGE LIMIT FOR REPLY BRIEF 

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed the First Amended Class Action Complaint (“Complaint”) in 

the above-titled action in this Court and served it on Defendant Ford Motor Company on 

November 12, 2013; 

WHEREAS, the Complaint includes 24 plaintiffs from 15 states collectively stating over 

80 causes of action; 

WHEREAS, Local Rule 7-11 permits a party to seek miscellaneous administrative relief, 

including permission “to exceed otherwise applicable page limitations,” pursuant to a stipulation 

by the parties; 

WHEREAS, Ford and Plaintiffs agreed to and received extensions of the page limit to 50 

pages for the memoranda of points and authorities in support of and opposition to Ford’s motion 

to dismiss; 

WHEREAS, Local Rule 7-3 provides that the reply brief in support of a motion to dismiss 

under Rule 12(b) may not exceed 15 pages;

WHEREAS, Ford anticipates that it may need as much as 30 pages for its reply brief in 

order to adequately respond to Plaintiffs’ opposition in light of the number of allegations and 

causes of action in the Complaint; 

WHEREAS, execution of this stipulation is not a waiver of any claims or defenses 

Plaintiffs or Defendant may otherwise have; 

Case 3:13-cv-03072-EMC Document 74 Filed 03/14/14 Page 2 of 5
- 2 - 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT 

ON REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

CV 13-3072-EMC 

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 

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by Plaintiffs and Ford, through their 

counsel of record, subject to the approval of the Court, that Ford shall have leave to file a reply 

brief of no more than 30 pages in support of its motion to dismiss to be filed on or before March 

14, 2014. 

Dated: March 13, 2014 Randall W. Edwards 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

By: /s/ Randall W. Edwards_____________ 

 Randall W. Edwards 

Attorneys for Defendant Ford Motor Company 

25

Case 3:13-cv-03072-EMC Document 74 Filed 03/14/14 Page 3 of 5
- 3 - 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT 

ON REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

CV 13-3072-EMC 

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 

Dated: March 13, 2014 Steve W. Berman 

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 

By: /s/ Steve W. Berman________________ 

 Steve W. Berman 

Steve W. Berman 

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 

1918 8th Avenue, Suite 3300 

Seattle, Washington 98101 

Tel: (206) 623-7292 

Fax: (206) 623-0594 

steve@hbsslaw.com 

Adam J. Levitt 

GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A. 

30 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1200 

Chicago, Illinois 60602 

Tel: (312) 214-0000 

Fax: (312) 214-0001 

alevitt@gelaw.com 

Roland Tellis (186269) 

Mark Pifko (228412) 

BARON & BUDD, P.C. 

15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600 

Encino, California 91436 

Tel: (818) 839-2320 

Fax: (818) 986-9698 

rtellis@baronbudd.com 

mpifko@baronbudd.com 

Joseph G. Sauder (pro hac vice) 

Matthew D. Schelkopf (pro hac vice) 

CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP 

One Haverford Centre 

361 West Lancaster Avenue 

Haverford, Pennsylvania 19041 

Tel: (610) 642-8500 

Fax: (610) 649-3633 

JGS@chimicles.com 

MDS@chimicles.com 

Plaintiffs’ Interim Co-Lead Counsel

Case 3:13-cv-03072-EMC Document 74 Filed 03/14/14 Page 4 of 5
- 4 - 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT 

ON REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

CV 13-3072-EMC 

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 

FILER’S ATTESTATION 

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that the other signatory listed, on whose 

behalf the filing is submitted, concurs in the filing’s content and has authorized the filing. 

Dated: March 13, 2014 Randall W. Edwards 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

By: /s/ Randall W. Edwards 

 Randall W. Edwards 

Attorney for Defendant Ford Motor Company 

O R D E R 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: March __, 2014 

 The Honorable Edward M. Chen 

 United States District Judge 

(as modified) 14

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

AS MODIFIED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:13-cv-03072-EMC Document 74 Filed 03/14/14 Page 5 of 5