Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05719/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-05719-0/pdf.json

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

---

-1- 

W02-WEST:5PSH1\402438914.2 

USDC Case No. C09-05719 JW (PVT) STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS’

TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

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

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

A Limited Liability Partnership 

Including Professional Corporations 

PETER S. HECKER, Cal. Bar No. 66159 

phecker@sheppardmullin.com 

4 Embarcadero, 17th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94111-4109 

Telephone: 415.434.9100 

Facsimile: 415.434.3947 

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

A Limited Liability Partnership 

Including Professional Corporations 

JAMES J. MITTERMILLER, Cal. Bar No. 85177 

jmittermiller@sheppardmullin.com 

501 West Broadway, 19th Floor 

San Diego, CA 92101-3598 

Telephone: 619.338.6500 

Facsimile: 619.234.3815 

Attorneys for Defendant PALM, INC. and 

Specially Appearing Defendant SPRINT NEXTEL CORP. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION 

Jason Standiford, an individual, on behalf of 

himself and all others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

PALM, INC., a Delaware corporation, and 

SPRINT NEXTEL CORP., a Kansas 

corporation and DOES 1 – 50, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

 Case No. C09-05719 JW (PVT) 

[Complaint Filed: Dec. 4, 2009] 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME 

WITHIN WHICH TO ANSWER OR 

OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE 

COMPLAINT 

[Northern District Local Rule 6-1(a)] 

Trial Date: None Set 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT AND ALL PARTIES HEREIN AND THEIR 

ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 

Pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rule 6-1(a), plaintiff Jason 

Standiford, on the one hand, and defendant Palm, Inc. and specially appearing defendant Sprint 

Nextel Corp. (collectively “defendants”) on the other hand, by and through their respective counsel, 

hereby stipulate and agree that defendants’ time within which to answer, move or otherwise plead 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

GRANTED

Judge James Ware

2/11/2010

Case 5:09-cv-05719-LHK Document 18 Filed 02/11/10 Page 1 of 2
-2- 

W02-WEST:5PSH1\402438914.2 

USDC Case No. C09-05719 JW (PVT) STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS’

TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

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

with respect to the Complaint on file in this action shall be extended to and including 

February 10, 2010. 

The parties have not previously stipulated to an extension of defendants’ time within 

which to respond to the Complaint in this action. 

THE PARTIES HEREBY SO STIPULATE. 

Dated: January 29, 2010 EDELSON McGUIRE, LLC 

PARISI & HAVENS, LLP 

 

 

By /s/ Michael J. Aschenbrener 

MICHAEL J. ASCHENBRENER 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

JASON STANDIFORD 

Dated: January 29, 2010 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & 

HAMPTON LLP 

 

By /s/ Peter S. Hecker 

PETER S. HECKER 

Attorneys for Defendant PALM, INC. 

and Specially Appearing Defendant 

SPRINT NEXTEL CORP. 

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45 

Pursuant to General Order No. 45 § X(B), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has 

been obtained from each of the other signatories listed above. 

January 29, 2010 By /s/ Peter S. Hecker 

PETER S. HECKER 

Case 5:09-cv-05719-LHK Document 18 Filed 02/11/10 Page 2 of 2