Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-02499/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-02499-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1346 Tort Claim

---

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 BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON DEFENDANTS’ RULE 12 MOTIONS AND 

ORDER THEREON 

GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP 

ADAM J. GUTRIDE (State Bar No. 181446) 

SETH A. SAFIER (State Bar No. 197427) 

TODD KENNEDY (State Bar No. 250267) 

ANTHONY PATEK (State Bar No. 228964) 

100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Telephone: (415) 639-9090 

Facsimile: (415) 449-6469 

adam@gutridesafier.com 

seth@gutridesafier.com 

todd@gutridesafier.com 

anthony@gutridesafier.com 

MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP 

Nicholas Migliaccio, pro hac vice pending 

Jason Rathod, pro hac vice pending 

Esfand Nafisi (State Bar No. 320119) 

412 H Street NE, Suite 302 

Washington, D.C. 20002 

Telephone: (202) 470-3520 

Facsimile: (202) 800-2730 

nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com 

jrathod@classlawdc.com 

enafisi@classlawdc.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BRADLEY COLGATE, an individual, and 

KAYTLIN MCKNIGHT, an individual, on 

behalf of themselves, the general public, and 

those similarly situated, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

JUUL LABS, INC. 

 Defendant. 

CASE NO. 4:18-cv-02499-WHO

STIPULATION TO EXTEND 

BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON 

DEFENDANTS’ RULE 12 MOTIONS 

AND ORDER THEREON 

Honorable William H. Orrick 

Action filed: April 26, 2018 

Case 3:18-cv-02499-WHO Document 43 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 4
-1- STIPULATION AND ORDER

Case No.18-cv-2499-WHO

WHEREAS, on July 24, 2018, Defendant Juul Labs, Inc. (“Defendant”) filed a 34-page 

motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 40) and a 24-page motion to strike 

Plaintiffs’ nationwide class allegations (Dkt. 41); 

WHEREAS, on June 22, 2018, the parties had stipulated that the deadline for Defendant 

to respond to the first amended complaint be extended from July 10, 2018 until July 24, 2018; 

that Plaintiffs’ opposition papers be due on or before August 14, 2018; and that Defendants’ 

reply papers be due on or before August 28, 2018, but did not set any date for hearing the motion 

(Dkt. 27); 

WHEREAS the June 22, 2018 stipulation did not include a proposed order and no order 

was issued thereon; 

WHEREAS, on July 17, 2018, at request of Defendant, the parties stipulated that 

Defendant be granted leave to exceed the 25-page limit for the prospective motion to dismiss by 

up to 10 pages, and that Plaintiffs be granted the same number of extra pages for their opposition 

to said motion, and the court so ordered (Dkt. 39); 

WHEREAS, Defendant set the hearing for the motion to dismiss and the motion to strike 

for September 5, 2018; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs require more time than was anticipated at the time of the June 22 

stipulation to respond to the motion to dismiss in light of its length, as well as to respond to the 

separate motion to strike; 

WHEREAS, given the complexity of the briefing and other existing commitments, 

Defendants also request an additional week (for a total of three weeks) to file their replies; 

WHEREAS, no other extensions have been granted, no trial date has been set, and a 

further extension of the briefing schedule and hearing will not cause prejudice to any party or the 

Court; 

NOW THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate as follows: 

1. Plaintiffs’ deadline to respond to the motion to dismiss and motion to 

strike (Dkts. 40-41) shall be extended to August 22, 2018; 

Case 3:18-cv-02499-WHO Document 43 Filed 08/07/18 Page 2 of 4
-2- STIPULATION AND ORDER

Case No.18-cv-2499-WHO

2. Defendants’ deadline to file reply papers in support of said motions shall 

be extended to September 12, 2018; 

3. The hearing on said motions shall be reset for September 26, 2018, at 2:00 

p.m., or such other time as the Court is next available. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: August 3, 2018 

GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP 

/s/ Adam J. Gutride 

Adam J. Gutride 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Dated: August 3, 2018 

GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

/s/ Austin J. Schwing Austin J. Schwing 

Counsel for Defendant 

Local Rule 5-1(i)(3) Certification

I, Adam Gutride, attest that I have received authority from each other signatory to file 

this document. 

GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP 

/s/ Adam J. Gutride 

Adam J. Gutride 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Case 3:18-cv-02499-WHO Document 43 Filed 08/07/18 Page 3 of 4
-3- STIPULATION AND ORDER

Case No.18-cv-2499-WHO

Based on the parties’ stipulation, and FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, it is ordered as 

follows: 

1. Plaintiffs’ deadline to respond to the motion to dismiss and motion to 

strike (Dkt. 40-41) shall be extended to August 22, 2018; 

2. Defendants’ deadline to file reply papers in support of said motions shall 

be extended to September 12, 2018; 

3. The hearing on said motions shall be reset for September 26, 2018, at 2:00 

p.m. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August __, 2018 

_____________________________ Hon. William H. Orrick 

United States District Judge 

Case 3:18-cv-02499-WHO Document 43 Filed 08/07/18 Page 4 of 4