Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02136/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02136-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Christopher Bayless
Plaintiff
Hughes Communications, Inc.
Defendant
Hughes Network Systems, LLC
Defendant
Eric Schumacher
Plaintiff
Tina Walter
Plaintiff

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 RE ANSWER 

CASE NO.: 09-CV-02136 SC 

\\058224/000230 - 39651 v1 

Robert B. Hawk (SBN 118054) 

J. Christopher Mitchell (SBN 215639) 

HOGAN & HARTSON LLP 

525 University Avenue, 4th Floor 

Palo Alto, California 94301 

Telephone: (650) 463-4000 

Facsimile: (650) 463-4199 

rbhawk@hhlaw.com 

jcmitchell@hhlaw.com 

Attorneys for Defendants 

HUGHES COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 

and HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS, LLC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TINA WALTER, CHRISTOPHER BAYLESS, 

and ERIC SCHUMACHER, individually and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs,

v.

HUGHES COMMUNICATIONS, INC. and 

HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS, LLC, 

Defendants.

CASE NO.: 09-CV-02136 SC 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING ANSWER TO 

PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED 

CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION 

COMPLAINT 

The Honorable Samuel Conti 

Case 3:09-cv-02136-SC Document 43 Filed 02/08/10 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

1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE ANSWER 

CASE NO.: 09-CV-02136 SC 

\\058224/000230 - 39651 v1 

WHEREAS, on October 5, 2009, Defendants Hughes Communications, Inc. and Hughes 

Network Systems, LLC (collectively, “Hughes” or “Defendants”) filed a Motion to Dismiss 

Plaintiffs’ Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the “Motion to Dismiss”); 

WHEREAS, on January 26, 2010, the Court issued an Order Granting in Part and Denying 

in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss; 

WHEREAS, an answer to the Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint is currently 

due on February 9, 2010; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs intend to amend their complaint in light of the Court’s order, and 

have 30 days from the date of the order in which to do so; 

WHEREAS, in the interests of efficiency and economy, the parties agree that Defendants 

need not file an answer to the Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, in light of 

Plaintiffs’ intention to file an amended complaint (the “New Complaint”), and that Defendants 

should instead file a response to the New Complaint, once it is filed;

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 3:09-cv-02136-SC Document 43 Filed 02/08/10 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

2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE ANSWER 

CASE NO.: 09-CV-02136 SC 

\\058224/000230 - 39651 v1 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties through their respective 

counsel, that: 1) Defendants are not required to file an answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended 

Consolidated Class Action Complaint; and 2) Defendants will answer or otherwise respond to 

Plaintiffs’ New Complaint within 20 days of the date the New Complaint is filed. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: February 5, 2010 HOGAN & HARTSON LLP 

 By: /s/____________ 

 Robert B. Hawk 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

HUGHES COMMUNICATIONS, INC. and 

HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS LLC 

Dated: February 5, 2010 AUDET & PARTNERS, LLP 

 By: /s/ __________ 

 Joshua C. Ezrin 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February ___, 2010 _____________________________________ 

THE HONORABLE SAMUEL CONTI 

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Samuel Conti

Case 3:09-cv-02136-SC Document 43 Filed 02/08/10 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

3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE ANSWER 

CASE NO.: 09-CV-02136 SC 

\\058224/000230 - 39651 v1 

 I, Robert B. Hawk, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this 

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Briefing Schedule for Defendants’ Motion to 

Dismiss. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Joshua Ezrin concurred 

in this filing. 

DATED: February 5, 2010 HOGAN & HARTSON LLP 

By /s/ 

Robert B. Hawk 

Case 3:09-cv-02136-SC Document 43 Filed 02/08/10 Page 4 of 4