Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03717/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03717-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 448
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights - Education
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

3:15-cv-03717-WHO 1

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S RULE 12(B)(6) 

MOTION TO DISMISS; ORDER 

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

IRWIN M. ZALKIN, ESQ. (#89957) 

DEVIN M. STOREY, ESQ. (#234271) 

ALEXANDER S. ZALKIN, ESQ. (#280813) 

RYAN M. COHEN. ESQ, (#261313) 

The Zalkin Law Firm, P.C. 

12555 High Bluff Drive, Suite 301

San Diego, CA 92130 

Tel: 858-259-3011 

Fax: 858-259-3015

Email: Irwin@zalkin.com

dms@zalkin.com

alex@zalkin.com

ryan@zalkin.com 

 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

SOFIE KARASEK, individually; 

NICOLETTA COMMINS, individually; 

ARYLE BUTLER, individually; 

Plaintiffs,

vs.

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY 

OF CALIFORNIA, a public entity, and 

DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No: 3:15-cv-03717-WHO

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO 

RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S RULE 

12(B)(6) MOTION TO DISMISS; 

ORDER

Place: Courtroom 2, 17th Floor

Judge: Hon. William H. Orrick 

 

Case 3:15-cv-03717-WHO Document 60 Filed 05/24/16 Page 1 of 3
3:15-cv-03717-WHO 2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S RULE 12(B)(6) 

MOTION TO DISMISS; ORDER 

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 TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S RULE 12(B)(6) 

MOTION TO DISMISS 

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1, the parties to the above entitled action, by and through their 

respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) in this Court on April 

11, 2016; 

WHEREAS, Defendant filed a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintffs’ Third Amended 

Complaint (“Motion to Dismiss”) on May 9, 2016; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is due on May 23, 2016; 

WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed that Plaintiffs may have an extension of 7 days to 

respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, which would make Plaintiffs’ response due on Tuesday, 

May 31, 2016; 

WHEREAS, currently, Defendant’s reply to Plaintiffs’ response is due on May 31, 2016; 

WHEREAS, Defendant’s new deadline to reply to Plaintiffs’ response to Defendant’s 

Motion to Dismiss would be June 7, 2016; 

WHEREAS, currently, the hearing date on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is scheduled for 

June 15, 2016; 

WHEREAS, if, given the new briefing schedule, the original hearing date is not convenient 

for the Court, the Court will move the hearing date to _______________; and 

WHEREAS, this stipulation will not alter any other date of any event or any deadline 

already fixed by Court order. 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between Plaintiffs and Defendant, by and through their 

undersigned attorneys, that Plaintiff shall have a 7-day extension to respond to Defendant’s Rule 

12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint, making Plaintiffs’ response due 

on or before May 31, 2016. 

Case 3:15-cv-03717-WHO Document 60 Filed 05/24/16 Page 2 of 3
3:15-cv-03717-WHO 3

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S RULE 12(B)(6) 

MOTION TO DISMISS; ORDER 

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: May 18, 2016 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 

 BRADLEY S. PHILLIPS 

 HAILYN J. CHEN 

 

 By: /s/ Bradley S. Phillips

 BRADLEY S. PHILLIPS 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

DATED: May 18, 2016 THE ZALKIN LAW FIRM, P.C. 

 IRWIN M. ZALKIN 

 DEVIN M. STOREY 

 ALEXANDER S. ZALKIN 

 RYAN M. COHEN 

By: /s/ Alexander S. Zalkin 

 Alexander S. Zalkin 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

ORDER

Plaintiffs’ new response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is due on Tuesday, May 31, 

2016; 

Defendant’s new deadline to reply to Plaintiffs’ response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss 

is due on June 7, 2016; 

The hearing date on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss remains June 15, 2016. 

Dated: May 24, 2016 ______________________________ 

 Hon. William H. Orrick 

 Judge of the United States District Court 

Case 3:15-cv-03717-WHO Document 60 Filed 05/24/16 Page 3 of 3