Case 3:21-cv-02437-RS Document 22 Filed 06/30/21 Page 1 of 3
`
`JENNER & BLOCK LLP
`Kate T. Spelman (Cal. Bar No. 269109)
`kspelman@jenner.com
`Alexander M. Smith (Cal. Bar No. 295187)
`asmith@jenner.com
`633 West 5th Street Suite 3600
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-2054
`Telephone: (213) 239-5100
`Facsimile:
`(213) 239-5199
`
`JENNER & BLOCK LLP
`Dean N. Panos (admitted pro hac vice)
`dpanos@jenner.com
`353 North Clark Street
`Chicago, IL 60654-3456
`Phone: (312) 222-9350
`Facsimile: (312) 527-0484
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`The Kraft Heinz Company
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`AARON CLARKE and MICHELLE DEVERA,
`individually and on behalf of all others similarly
`situated,
`
`Case No. 3:21-cv-02437-RS
`
`The Honorable Richard Seeborg
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`THE KRAFT HEINZ COMPANY.
`
`Defendant.
`
`STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET
`BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND CONTINUE
`CERTAIN DEADLINES
`
`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
`CASE NO. 3:21-CV-02437-RS
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-02437-RS Document 22 Filed 06/30/21 Page 2 of 3
`
`WHEREAS:
`1.
`Pursuant to a waiver of service, The Kraft Heinz Company’s deadline to respond to
`Plaintiffs’ initial Complaint is July 2, 2021;
`2.
`Plaintiffs have indicated that they intend to file an amended complaint;
`3.
`In light of Plaintiffs’ intention to file an amended complaint, the parties agree that Kraft
`Heinz need not respond to Plaintiffs’ initial complaint and that any motion to dismiss or other responsive
`pleading should be directed at Plaintiffs’ amended complaint;
`4.
`Kraft Heinz filed a motion to transfer venue of this action to the U.S. District Court for the
`Northern District of Illinois on June 22, 2021, and Plaintiffs’ opposition is currently due on July 6, 2021;
`5.
`Plaintiffs have requested, and Kraft Heinz has agreed to provide, an extension of Plaintiffs’
`deadline to oppose its motion to transfer venue to and including July 16, 2021;
`6.
`Kraft Heinz has requested, and Plaintiffs have agreed to provide, an extension of Kraft
`Heinz’s deadline to file a reply in support of its motion to transfer venue to and including July 29, 2021;
`7.
`The parties agree that Kraft Heinz’s motion to dismiss any amended complaint shall be due
`21 days following a ruling on Kraft Heinz’s pending motion to transfer venue;
`8.
`The extensions provided by this Stipulation will not affect any dates set by Court order, and
`the parties agree that this stipulation is not for the purpose of delay;
`NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS, subject to Court
`approval:
`Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint on or before July 9, 2021;
`1.
`Kraft Heinz need not file a response to Plaintiffs’ initial complaint;
`2.
`Plaintiffs’ deadline to oppose Kraft Heinz’s pending motion to transfer venue is extended
`3.
`from July 6, 2021 to and including July 16, 2021;
`4.
`Kraft Heinz shall file a reply in support of its motion to transfer venue on or before July 29,
`
`2021;
`
`Kraft Heinz’s response to any amended complaint shall be due 21 days following this
`5.
`Court’s ruling on its pending motion to transfer venue;
`
`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
`CASE NO. 3:21-CV-02437-RS
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-02437-RS Document 22 Filed 06/30/21 Page 3 of 3
`
`If this Stipulation is approved, Kraft Heinz agrees to withdraw its pending administrative
`6.
`motion to stay (ECF No. 18) as moot.
`
`IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED:
`
`Dated: June 30, 2021
`
`Dated: June 30, 2021
`
`JENNER & BLOCK LLP
`By: /s/ Alexander M. Smith
`Alexander M. Smith
`Attorneys for Defendant
`The Kraft Heinz Company
`
`BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.1
`By: /s/ L. Timothy Fisher
`L. Timothy Fisher
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`Aaron Clarke & Michelle DeVera
`
`PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:
`
`Dated: ______________, 2021
`June 30
`
`By: __________________________________
`The Honorable Richard Seeborg
`United States District Judge
`
`1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I, Alexander M. Smith, hereby attest that concurrence in the filing
`of this document has been obtained from all other signatories hereto.
`2
`STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
`CASE NO. 3:21-CV-02437-RS
`
`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
`
`