Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03961/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03961-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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

STIPULATION AND REQUEST FOR ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON 

MOTION TO DISMISS AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Copple v. Astrella & Rice, P.C., et al.

Case No. C 05 3961 JSW

JOSEPH WOOD [Calif. SBN 103596]

425 California Street, Nineteenth Floor

San Francisco, California 94104

Telephone: (415) 310-5692

Facsimile: (415) 391-7979

Attorney for Plaintiff, Robert W. Copple,

on behalf of himself and of all others

similarly situated

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT W. COPPLE, Case No. C 05 3961 JSW

on behalf of himself and of

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND REQUEST 

 FOR ORDER CONTINUING

vs. HEARING ON MOTION TO 

 DISMISS AND CONTINUING

ASTRELLA & RICE, P.C.; BAKER, CASE MANAGEMENT

BURTON & LUNDY, P.C.; CONFERENCE

ENGSTROM, LIPSCOMB & LACK;

GIRARDI & KEESE; J. TYNAN KELLY;

KIESEL, BOUCHER & LARSON, LLP; 

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN &

BERNSTEIN, LLP; M. BRIAN 

McMAHON; O’DONNELL & SHAEFFER,

LLP; MICHAEL J. PONCE; FRANCIS O. 

SCARPULLA; and DOUGLAS A. 

STACEY,

Defendants. 

_____________________________________/ 

Case 3:05-cv-03961-JSW Document 19 Filed 05/01/06 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

STIPULATION AND REQUEST FOR ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON 

MOTION TO DISMISS AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Copple v. Astrella & Rice, P.C., et al.

Case No. C 05 3961 JSW 1

The parties to the above-named action, through their respective counsel, in order to

accommodate the present illness of plaintiff’s counsel, hereby stipulate and agree to the

following:

(a) that the hearing on defendants’ pending motion to dismiss, currently set for

9:00 a.m. on May 19, 2006, should be continued to 9:00 a.m. on June 9, 2006;

(b) that plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to dismiss should be made due on

May 12, 2006; and 

(c) that the case management conference herein, presently set for immediately

following the hearing on the motion to dismiss on May 19, 2006, should be continued to

immediately following the hearing on the motion to dismiss on June 9, 2006. 

The parties respectfully request that the Court issue its order in accordance with the

above-stated stipulation and agreement.

DATED: April 27, 2006

/s/ Joseph Wood 

Joseph Wood

Attorney for Plaintiff, Robert W. Copple, on

behalf of himself and of all others similarly 

situated

HOWARD RICE NEMEROVSKI CANADY FALK & RABIN

/s/ Ethan P. Schulman 

Ethan P. Schulman

Attorneys for Defendants, Astrella & Rice, P.C.; 

Baker, Burton & Lundy, P.C.; Engstrom, Lipscomb

& Lack; Girardi & Keese; J. Tynan Kelly; Kiesel, 

Boucher & Larson, LLP; Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann 

& Bernstein, LLP; M. Brian Mcmahon; O’Donnell 

& Shaeffer, LLP; Michael J. Ponce; Francis O. 

Scarpulla; and Douglas A. Stacey

The parties are reminded to submit proposed orders with 

future filings.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

GRANTED

Judge Jeffrey S. White

May 1, 2006

Case 3:05-cv-03961-JSW Document 19 Filed 05/01/06 Page 2 of 2