govinfo:USCOURTS-cand-5_11-cv-01263-4

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TEMPORARILY STAYING DISCOVERY; 
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-01263-JF 
 
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 
MAYER BROWN LLP 
Edward D. Johnson (SBN 189475) 
wjohnson@mayerbrown.com 
Donald M. Falk (SBN 150256) 
dfalk@mayerbrown.com 
John M. Neukom (SBN 275887) 
jneukom@mayerbrown.com 
Hamsa M. Murthy (SBN 274745) 
hmurthy@mayerbrown.com 
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300 
3000 El Camino Real 
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112 
Telephone: (650) 331-2000 
Facsimile: (650) 331-2060 
Attorne
ys for Defendant Google Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
SAN JOSE DIVISION  
RICK WOODS, Individually  and On Behalf of 
Others Similarly Situated, 
 
    P l a i n t i f f ,  
 
 v. 
 
GOOGLE INC., 
 
    Defendant. 
 
 
Case No. 5:11-cv-01263-JF 
 
JOINT STIPULATIONAND 
[PROPOSED] ORDER TEMPORARILY 
STAYING DISCOVERY 
The parties jointly enter into the following stipulation: 
1. On June 24, 2011, Defendant Google Inc. (“Google”) filed its Motion for 
Temporary Stay of Discovery (the “Motion”).  Dkt. No. 51.  In the Motion, Google 
requested that the Court temporarily “stay discovery pending resolution of the pleadings in 
this case.”  See Motion at 9.  The Motion is calendared for a hearing on August 12, 2011. 
2. In a hearing on July 8, 2011, the Court asked that Woods “wait until [he] 
g[o]t an indication from [the Court] before starting discovery,” and further instructed 
Woods not to “pursue any discovery until [the Court] ha[d] an opportunity to consider 
[Google’s Motion for a Temporary Stay of Discovery].”  7/8/11 Transcript of Proceedings 
at 29-30.  To date, Plaintiff Woods (“Woods”) has not sought any discovery from Google.  
**E-Filed 8/12/2011**
------------------
Case 5:11-cv-01263-EJD     Document 67     Filed 08/12/11     Page 1 of 3
 
2 
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TEMPORARILY STAYING DISCOVERY; 
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-01263-JF 
 
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. On August 10, 2011, the Court entered an order dismissing Woods’ 
complaint with leave to amend (the “Dismissal Order”).  Dkt. No. 64. 
4. Given the Dismissal Order, the parties hereby agree not to seek any 
discovery from the other in this action unless and until the Court finds by written order that 
at least one claim has been adequately pled against Google. 
5. Based on this stipulation, Google agrees to withdraw its Motion without 
prejudice. 
Dated: August 11, 2011 
 
MAYER BROWN LLP 
 
  /s/ Edward D. Johnson 
Edward D. Johnson 
Donald M. Falk 
John M. Neukom 
Hamsa M. Murthy 
Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc. 
Dated: August 11, 2011 
 
NIX, PATTERSON & ROACH, LLP  
 
  /s/ Brad E. Seidel 
Jeffrey J. Angelovich  
Brad E. Seidel  
 
KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER  
& CHECK, LLP 
Ramzi Abadou 
Stacey M. Kaplan 
Erik D. Peterson 
Sean M. Handler  
Joseph H. Meltzer  
Peter H. LeVan, Jr.  
Naumon A. Amjed  
Ryan T. Degnan  
Counsel for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 
 I attest that concurrence in  the filing of this document has been obtained from Brad 
E. Seidel for Plaintiff. 
 
     By:            /s/   Edward D. Johnson                           
 
Case 5:11-cv-01263-EJD     Document 67     Filed 08/12/11     Page 2 of 3
 
3 
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TEMPORARILY STAYING DISCOVERY; 
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-01263-JF 
 
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 
[PROPOSED] ORDER 
 Pursuant to the foregoing stipulation, it is hereby ORDERED that discovery in this 
action is stayed until the Court finds by written order that at least one claim has been 
adequately pled against Google. 
 
      ____________________________________
 
      Judge Jeremy D. Fogel 
 
 
 
 
-------------------
Case 5:11-cv-01263-EJD     Document 67     Filed 08/12/11     Page 3 of 3

Passage view · GavelSight