Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-02843/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-02843-12/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Beverly Nunes
Plaintiff
Twitter, Inc.
Defendant

Document Text:

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 [PROPOSED] ORDER

REGARDING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

AND CASE SCHEDULE

CASE NO.: 14-CV-02843-VC

JOHN G. JACOBS (PRO HAC VICE)

BRYAN G. KOLTON (PRO HAC VICE)

JACOBS KOLTON, CHTD.

55 West Monroe Street, Suite 2970

Chicago, Illinois 60603

Telephone: (312) 427-4000

Facsimile: (312) 268-2425

Email: jgjacobs@jacobskolton.com

Email: bgkolton@jacobskolton.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Beverly Nunes

DAVID H. KRAMER, State Bar No. 168452

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

Professional Corporation

650 Page Mill Road

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050

Telephone: (650) 493-9300

Facsimile: (650) 493-6811

Email: dkramer@wsgr.com

Attorneys for Defendant Twitter, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

BEVERLY NUNES, individually and on behalf 

of a class of similarly situated individuals,

Plaintiff,

v.

TWITTER, INC.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO.: 14-cv-02843-VC

STIPULATION AND

[PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING STAY OF

PROCEEDINGS AND CASE 

SCHEDULE

Case 3:14-cv-02843-VC Document 61 Filed 09/10/15 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

REGARDING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

AND CASE SCHEDULE

CASE NO.: 14-CV-02843-VC

-2-

Plaintiff Beverly Nunes (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Twitter, Inc. (“Twitter”) (collectively, “the Parties”) hereby request an amendment to the Stipulated Order Continuing Stay of Proceedings and Modifying Case Schedule entered by the Court on July 10, 2015 (Dkt. 58) (the “July 10 Stipulation and Order”). In support of that request, the parties agree as follows: 

1. The July 10 Stipulation and Order was based in part on the pendency of multiple 

petitions before the FCC seeking rulings on issues pertaining to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) – the statute at issue in this action. The FCC voted on those petitions on June 

18, 2015, and the FCC released its written Declaratory Ruling and Order, FCC 15-72, on July 10, 

2015 (the “FCC Order”). Among other rulings pertinent to this action, the FCC interpreted the 

terms “automatic telephone dialing system,” and “prior express consent of the called party.” 

Those and other aspects of the FCC Order are the subject of multiple appeals that have been consolidated in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. See ACA Int’l v. FCC, No. 

15-1211 (D.C. Cir.) (consolidated with Nos. 15-1214, 1218, 1244, 1278). 

2. The FCC Order also discusses the issue of who can be deemed to have made calls

within the meaning of the TCPA so as to face potential TCPA liability for those text messages. 

Twitter believes that, based on the FCC Order, it cannot be deemed to have made text message 

calls within the meaning of the TCPA and is therefore absolved of liability in this case. Twitter 

also contends that it is immune from liability as an interactive computer service provider under 

the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”), 47 U.S.C. §230(c)(1). Plaintiff disagrees and believes that under the FCC Order and existing law Twitter is liable for making text message calls

within the meaning of the TCPA. The Parties do agree, however, that whether Twitter made the 

text message calls within the meaning of the FCC’s Order and the TCPA, and whether §230(c) 

affords immunity to Twitter, are questions that can be brought before the Court on summary 

judgment motions with what they anticipate will be minimal discovery and/or stipulated facts. 

3. Given the potentially dispositive nature of these issues, and in light of the uncertainty created by the pending appeals of the FCC Order on other issues in the case, the Parties 

agree that the case should proceed at this time only with respect to the maker-of-the call and 

Case 3:14-cv-02843-VC Document 61 Filed 09/10/15 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

REGARDING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

AND CASE SCHEDULE

CASE NO.: 14-CV-02843-VC

-3-

§230(c) issues. With respect to issues involving an “automatic telephone dialing system,” and 

“prior express consent of the called party,” the case should be stayed pending the FCC Order appeals. 

THE PARTIES THEREFORE STIPULATE to amend the July 10 Stipulation and Order 

through their undersigned counsel, subject to the Court’s approval, as follows:

1. The Parties shall proceed with discovery limited to the issues of whether Twitter 

made the text message calls within the meaning of the FCC’s Order and the TCPA and the asserted immunity under §230(c) based on the existing case schedule entered on July 10, 2015: 

Discovery on these issues shall be completed by January 13, 2016; Initial Expert Witness statements shall be submitted by January 29, 2016; Rebuttal Expert Witness statements shall be submitted by February 12, 2016; Motions for Summary Judgment on issue of whether Twitter made 

text message calls shall be heard on June 2, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. The Parties shall work in good 

faith to stipulate to the facts pertinent to these motions. 

2. The stay of proceedings in the matter otherwise shall remain in place pending the 

FCC Order appeal. Should the case continue following resolution of the contemplated summary 

judgment motions, the Parties will meet and confer regarding an appropriate schedule. 

DATE: September 8, 2015 /s/ David H. Kramer

David H. Kramer

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

Attorneys for Defendant Twitter, Inc.

DATE: September 8, 2015 /s/ John G. Jacobs

John G. Jacobs (PRO HAC VICE)

JACOBS KOLTON, CHTD

Jeffrey F. Keller 

KELLER GROVER, LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiff Beverly Nunes

Case 3:14-cv-02843-VC Document 61 Filed 09/10/15 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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

REGARDING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

AND CASE SCHEDULE

CASE NO.: 14-CV-02843-VC

-4-

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS SO ORDERED.

SIGNED this ____ day of September, 2015.

__________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10th

Case 3:14-cv-02843-VC Document 61 Filed 09/10/15 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

CERTIFICATION

CASE NO.: 14-CV-02843-VC

CERTIFICATION

I, David H. Kramer, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used 

to file this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND CASE SCHEDULE. In compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i), I hereby 

attest that John G. Jacobs has concurred in this filing.

DATE: September 8, 2015 /s/ David H. Kramer

David H. Kramer

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

Professional Corporation

650 Page Mill Road

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050

Telephone: (650) 493-9300

Facsimile: (650) 493-6811

Email: dkramer@wsgr.com

Attorney for Defendant Twitter, Inc.

Case 3:14-cv-02843-VC Document 61 Filed 09/10/15 Page 5 of 5