Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03903/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03903-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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 

762539.1 CASE NO. C-06-3903 THE 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: EXPANSION OF PAGE LIMITS FOR FINAL APPROVAL PLEADINGS 

Kelly M. Dermody (State Bar No. 171716) 

Heather H. Wong (State Bar No. 238546) 

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & 

BERNSTEIN, LLP 

275 Battery Street, 30th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 

Telephone: (415) 956-1000 

Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 

email: kdermody@lchb.com 

email: hwong@lchb.com 

Adam T. Klein (pro hac vice) 

Piper Hoffman (pro hac vice)

Justin M. Swartz (pro hac vice) 

OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP 

3 Park Avenue, 29th Floor 

New York, New York 10016 

Telephone: (212) 245-1000 

Facsimile: (212) 977-4005 

email: atk@outtengolden.com 

email: ph@outtengolden.com 

email: jms@outtengolden.com 

Rebecca D. Eisen (State Bar No. 96129 ) 

Kent M. Roger (State Bar No. 95987 ) 

L. Julius M. Turman (State Bar No. 226126) 

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 

One Market, Spear Tower 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Direct: 415.442.1361 

Fax: 415.442.1001 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Attorneys for the Plaintiff 

[Additional counsel on signature page] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO / OAKLAND DIVISION 

MARGARET BENAY CURTIS-BAUER 

on behalf of herself and all others similarly 

situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

MORGAN STANLEY & CO., 

INCORPORATED , f/k/a MORGAN 

STANLEY DW INC., 

 Defendant. 

Case No. C-06-3903 TEH 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING EXPANSION OF 

PAGE LIMITATIONS FOR FINAL 

SETTLEMENT APPROVAL PLEADINGS

Date: June 16, 2008 

Time: 10:00 a.m. 

Courtroom: 12 

Honorable Thelton E. Henderson 

Case 3:06-cv-03903-TEH Document 178 Filed 05/14/08 Page 1 of 4
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 

762539.1 - 1 - CASE NO. C-06-3903 THE 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: EXPANSION OF PAGE LIMITS FOR MPA RE: FINAL SETTLEMENT APPROVAL 

STIPULATION

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2008, the Parties shall move for a Final Order approving 

the settlement reached in this matter, which shall be heard on June 16, 2008. 

WHEREAS, objections to the final approval of the settlement have been filed. 

WHEREAS, Plaintiff seeks to file a Memorandum of Points of Authority in 

Support of the Parties’ Motion for Final Settlement Approval which fully addresses the issues 

raised by the objectors. 

WHEREAS, Defendant will likely file a Memorandum of Points of Authority in 

response to Plaintiff’s Memorandum and in reply to the Objectors’ Memorandum in response to 

Plaintiff’s Memorandum, which fully addresses the issues raised. 

WHEREAS, it is in the interests of both the Parties and the Court to ensure that all 

issues relevant to the settlement and the objections to it are fully briefed and presented to the 

Court. Thus, a longer, more detailed Memorandum in support of the the Parties’ Motion for Final 

Settlement Approval and the Parties’ Replies to the Objectors’ Memorandum in Response to 

Plaintiff’s Memorandum should assist the Court by aiding in the consideration of a large body of 

relevant evidence. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS 

FOLLOWS: 

Plaintiff shall be permitted to exceed the 25-page limit by not more than 

15 additional pages in her Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of the Parties’ 

Motion for Final Settlement Approval and in Reply to the Objectors’ Memorandum in Response 

to Plaintiff’s Memorandum; and 

Defendant shall be permitted to exceed the 25-page limit by not more than 

15 additional pages in its Memorandum of Points and Authorities in response to Plaintiff’s 

Memorandum in support of the Parties’ Motion for Final Settlement Approval and in reply to the 

Objectors’ Memorandum in response to Plaintiff’s Memorandum. 

 IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 

Case 3:06-cv-03903-TEH Document 178 Filed 05/14/08 Page 2 of 4
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 

762539.1 - 2 - CASE NO. C-06-3903 THE 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: EXPANSION OF PAGE LIMITS FOR MPA RE: FINAL SETTLEMENT APPROVAL 

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: May 12, 2008 

Elizabeth A. Alexander (pro hac vice) 

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & 

BERNSTEIN, LLP 

One Nashville Place 

150 Fourth Avenue N., Suite 1650 

Nashville, TN 37219-2423 

Telephone: (615) 313-9000 

Facsimile: (615) 313-9965 

By: /s/ Elizabeth A. Alexander 

 Elizabeth A. Alexander 

Kelly M. Dermody (State Bar No. 171716) 

Heather H. Wong (State Bar No. 238546) 

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & 

BERNSTEIN, LLP 

Embarcadero Center West 

275 Battery Street, 30th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 

Telephone: (415) 956-1000 

Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 

Adam T. Klein (pro hac vice) 

Piper Hoffman (pro hac vice) 

Justin M. Swartz (pro hac vice) 

OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP 

3 Park Avenue, 29th Floor 

New York, New York 10016 

Telephone: (212) 245-1000 

Facsimile: (212) 977-4005 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

James M. Finberg (State Bar No. 114850) 

ALTSHULER BERZON 

177 Post Street, Ste. 300 

San Francisco, CA 94108 

Telephone: (415) 421-7151 

Facsimile: (415) 362-8064 

Dated: May 12, 2008 By: /s/ L. Julius M. Turman

 L. Julius M. Turman 

Rebecca D. Eisen (State Bar No. 96129 ) 

Kent M. Roger (State Bar No. 95987 ) 

L. Julius M. Turman (State Bar No. 226126) 

Gregg Paris Yates (State Bar No. 224641 

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 

One Market, Spear Tower 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Direct: (415) 442-1361 

Fax: (415) 442-1001 

Attorneys for Defendant

Case 3:06-cv-03903-TEH Document 178 Filed 05/14/08 Page 3 of 4
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 

762539.1 - 3 - CASE NO. C-06-3903 THE 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: EXPANSION OF PAGE LIMITS FOR MPA RE: FINAL SETTLEMENT APPROVAL 

GOOD CAUSE HAVING BEEN SHOWN, IT IS SO ORDERED THAT: 

 Plaintiff shall be permitted to exceed the 25-page limit by not more than 

15 additional pages in her Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of the Parties’ 

Motion for Final Settlement Approval; and 

Defendant shall be permitted to exceed the 25-page limit by not more than 

15 additional pages in its Memorandum of Points and Authorities in response to Plaintiff’s 

Memorandum in support of the Parties’ Motion for Final Settlement Approval and in reply to the 

Objectors’ Memorandum in response to Plaintiff’s Memorandum. 

Dated: ____________________ The Hon. Thelton E. Henderson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Thelton E. Henderson

05/13/08

Case 3:06-cv-03903-TEH Document 178 Filed 05/14/08 Page 4 of 4