Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-01421/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-01421-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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 Case No. 3:16-cv-01421-WHO

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR AND ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE, AND CONTINUING CMC

BAKER LAW, PC

George Richard Baker, Cal. Bar No. 224003

436 N. Stanley Avenue

Los Angeles, California 90036

Telephone: 323.452.9685

richard@bakerlawpc.com

ROSE LAW GROUP, PC

Kathryn Honecker (pro hac vice)

Lauren Nageotte (pro hac vice)

7144 E Stetson Drive, Suite 300

Scottsdale, Arizona 85251

Telephone: 480.505.3936

khonecker@roselawgroup.com

lnageotte@roselawgroup.com

docket@roselawgroup.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

WILLIAM RUSHING, Individually and on 

Behalf of all Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILLIAMS-SONOMA, INC., a Delaware 

corporation, also d/b/a Williams-Sonoma And 

Williams-Sonoma Home; WILLIAMSSONOMA DTC, INC., a California 

corporation; WILLIAMS-SONOMA 

ADVERTISING, INC., a California 

corporation; WILLIAMS-SONOMA 

STORES, INC., a California corporation; 

POTTERY BARN, INC., a California 

corporation; POTTERY BARN KIDS, INC., a 

California corporation, also d/b/a Pottery Barn 

Baby; POTTERY BARN TEEN, INC., a 

California corporation also d/b/a PB Teen and 

PB Dorm; WEST ELM, INC., a California 

corporation; and DOES 1-30,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:16-cv-01421-WHO

Assigned to the Hon. William H. Orrick

CLASS ACTION

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR AND 

ORDER:

(1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO 

FILE SECOND AMENDED 

COMPLAINT;

(2) SETTING DEFENDANTS’ 

DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT;

(3) SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

FOR DEFENDANTS’ ANTICIPATED 

MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT; AND

(4) CONTINUING JUNE 21, 2016 CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

Case 3:16-cv-01421-WHO Document 20 Filed 05/05/16 Page 1 of 5
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- Case No. 3:16-cv-01421-WHO

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE, AND 

CHANGING TIME OF HEARING AND CMC

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a) and 16(b)(4) and Civil Local Rules 6-

1(a), 6-1(b), 6-2, 7-12, 10-1, and 16-2(e), Plaintiff and Defendants (collectively, the “Parties”), 

by and through their respective counsel, hereby respectfully stipulate and jointly request that the 

Court grant Plaintiff leave to file a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), set the time for 

Defendants to respond to Plaintiff’s proposed Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”), set a briefing 

schedule for Defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss the TAC, and continue the Case 

Management Conference currently set for June 21, 2016 (“CMC”) until after ruling on 

Defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss.

RECITALS

WHEREAS, on January 29, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in this matter in the 

Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Francisco.

WHEREAS, on March 8, 2016, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) in the 

Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Francisco. 

WHEREAS, on March 25, 2016, Defendants removed this case to federal court pursuant 

to the 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446 (Doc. 1).

WHEREAS, on March 29, 2016, the Parties stipulated to extend Defendants’ deadline to 

respond to the FAC from March 30, 2016 to April 20, 2016 (Doc. 5). This was the only prior 

time modification that has been made in this case. 

WHEREAS, on April 20, 2016, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the FAC, which is 

currently set for hearing on June 8, 2016 at 2:00 P.M. in Courtroom 2 (Doc. 12).

WHEREAS, on April 21, 2016, the Court issued an Order Setting Initial Case 

Management Conference in this matter for June 21, 2016 at 2:00 P.M. in Courtroom 2 (Doc. 13). 

WHEREAS, under the Court’s normal briefing schedule, Plaintiff’s deadline to respond

to Defendants’ motion to dismiss is May 4, 2016.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff seeks to amend the FAC to clarify and narrow the class definition, 

address several of the other issues raised in Defendants’ motion to dismiss, and add additional 

Case 3:16-cv-01421-WHO Document 20 Filed 05/05/16 Page 2 of 5
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 Case No. 3:16-cv-01421-WHO

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR AND ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE, AND CONTINUING CMC

claims, including a claim under the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (the “CLRA”), 

California Civil Code § 1750, et seq. A copy of the SAC Plaintiff seeks to file is attached hereto 

as Exhibit A.

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that filing of the SAC will render Defendants’ pending 

motion to dismiss moot.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff intends to submit a CLRA notice letter to Defendants on May 4, 

2016, which notice letter Defendants have agreed to accept by email to Defendants’ counsel. If 

Plaintiff’s CLRA claim is not resolved within 30 days of May 4, 2016, in accordance with 

California Civil Code § 1782(b), Plaintiff plans to filed a TAC for the sole purpose of seeking 

permissible damages for the CLRA claim alleged in the SAC. For avoidance of doubt, 

Defendants do not waive their right to pursue any challenges to the SAC or TAC including, but 

not limited, the addition of any damages claims under the CLRA. 

WHEREAS, the Parties’ agree that Plaintiff’s TAC would render moot any motion to 

dismiss the SAC.

WHEREAS, the Parties met and conferred on April 27, 2016, by telephone and email,

and agreed to the terms of this stipulation and [proposed] order and that continuing the Initial 

Case Management Conference until after the Court has heard and ruled on Defendants’ motion to 

dismiss the TAC will not, at this early stage, have a significant effect on the overall schedule for 

this case and would be in the Parties’ best interests and in the interest of judicial economy by 

allowing them to focus their attention and resources on the issues that will proceed in the 

litigation. 

The Parties therefore stipulate to and request that the Court issue the following order:

1. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), Plaintiff is granted leave to file 

a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) in the form attached as Exhibit A and the SAC is 

deemed filed as of May 4, 2016.

Case 3:16-cv-01421-WHO Document 20 Filed 05/05/16 Page 3 of 5
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 Case No. 3:16-cv-01421-WHO

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR AND ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE, AND CONTINUING CMC

2. Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss (Doc. 12) is deemed moot and the June 8, 

2016 hearing is vacated. Plaintiff is relieved with certainty of his obligation to respond to the 

pending motion to dismiss.

3. Plaintiff shall file a TAC on June 6, 2016. 

4. Defendants intend to file a response to the TAC on or before June 8, 2016, but do 

not waive their right to respond to the TAC within the time provided for by the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure. 

5. If Defendants file a motion to dismiss the TAC on June 8, 2016, the following 

briefing schedule shall apply to that motion:

 Plaintiffs shall file his opposition on or before June 29, 2016; and

 Defendants shall file their reply on or before July 13, 2016.

6. If Defendants do not file a response to the TAC on or before June 8, 2016, the 

parties agree to confer regarding a briefing schedule for any motion to dismiss the TAC filed 

after June 8, 2016. 

7. The Initial Case Management Conference, currently set for June 21, 2016, and all 

related deadlines are continued until at least 30 days after ruling on Defendants’ motion to 

dismiss the SAC. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

E-FILING ATTESTATION

By her signature below, counsel for Plaintiffs attest that counsel for all parties whose 

electronic signatures appear below have concurred in this filing of this Stipulation.

Dated: May 4, 2016 ROSE LAW GROUP, PC

/s/ Kathryn Honecker

Kathryn Honecker (pro hac vice)

Lauren Nageotte (pro hac vice)

7144 E Stetson Drive, Suite 300

Scottsdale, Arizona 85251

Telephone: 480.505.3936

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 3:16-cv-01421-WHO Document 20 Filed 05/05/16 Page 4 of 5
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 Case No. 3:16-cv-01421-WHO

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR AND ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE, AND CONTINUING CMC

Dated: May 4, 2016 SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

/s/ Benjamin O. Aigboboh

Benjamin O. Aigboboh 

Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor

San Francisco, California 94111-4109

Telephone: 415.434.9100

Facsimile: 415.434.3947

Attorneys for Defendants

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED as modified below:

1. The hearing date on any motion to dismiss is August 10, 2016 at 2 p.m. If the 

parties vary from the schedule set forth in the stipulation, any reply brief shall be filed 

at least two weeks prior to the date of the hearing.

2. The continued Case Management Conference is set for September 6, 2016 at 2 p.m.

DATED: May 5, 2016

The Honorable William H. Orrick

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-01421-WHO Document 20 Filed 05/05/16 Page 5 of 5