Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:05-cv—00473-JJF Document 5 Filed 07/28/2005 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
" ROBERT J. RAINWATER, KATHY ANN )
CHAPMAN, and SONIA YACO, on their own )
behalves and on behalf of all others similarly )
situated, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) C. A. No. 05-473-.lJF
)
v. )
)
INTEL CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, )
)
Defendant. )
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE FILING DATE
FOR DEFENDANTS RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT
IT IS STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES, THROUGH
THEIR COUNSEL AS FOLLOWS:
Plaintiffs Robert I. Rainwater, Kathy Ann Chapman, and Sonia Yaco, and
Defendant Intel Corporation hereby stipulate that Intel Corporation’s response to
Plaintiffs’ complaint shall be due either (1) the earlier of 60 days after transfer of the
above-captioned case pursuant to any motion to coordinate or consolidate pre—trial
proceedings per 28 U.S.C. § 1407 or such time for response that the transferee Court may
require for any action made part of the same MDL, or, (2) 45 days after any such motion
has been denied. The parties request this transfer because the plaintiffs in Brauc/1, et al.
v. Intel Corp., No. C 05-2743 (BZ) (ND. Cal., filed July 5, 2005), a related matter, have
filed a petition to coordinate or consolidate pre—tria1 proceedings per 28 l}.S.C. § l407,
and the above—sty1ed action has been identified as a related action to that petition. As a
result, the outcome ofthe pending petition will impact significantly the schedule of this
case.

Case 1:05-cv—00473-JJF Document 5 Filed 07/28/2005 Page 2 of 3
This is the tirst stipulation between the parties. Because this iitigation has
just begun, granting such a stipulation wil} not have any negative impact on the schedule
of this CHSB.
CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP
By: /s/ A. Zachug Ngylor By: /s/ Richard L . Horwitz
Pamela S. Tikeliis (#2172) Richard Horwitz (#2246)
Robert J. Kriner, Jr. (#2546) W. Harding Drane, Jr. (#1023)
A. Zachary Naylor (#4439) Hercules Plaza, 6m Floor
One Rodney Square 1313 N. Market Street
P.O. Box 1035 P.O. Box 951
Wilmington, DE 19999 Wilmington, DE 19801
Telephone: (302) 656~2500 Phone: (302) 984—6000
Facsimile: (302) 656-9053 Facsimile: (302) 658—li92
pamelatikeilis(@chimicles.com rhorwitz{@,potteranderson.com
[email protected] wdrane(@,potteranderson.com
zachrynaylor(@chimicles.com
OF COUNSEL:
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ROBERT J. RAINWATER, KATHY ANN David M. Balabanian
CHAPMAN, and SONIA. YACO Christopher B. Hackett
Joy K. Fuyuno
BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP
Dated: July 28, 2005 Three Embarcadero Center
San Francisco, CA 94111-4067
Telephone: (415) 393-2000
Facsimile: (415) 393-2286
Richard A. Ripley
BINGHAM McCUTCI-{EN LLP
1120 20m Street, N.W., Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20036
Telephone: (202) 778-6101
Facsimile: (202) 393-6929
Attorneys for Defendant
INTEL CORPORATION
692332
2

Case 1:05-cv—00473-JJF Document 5 Filed 07/28/2005 Page 3 of 3
ORDER TO CONTINUE })EFENl')AN'1"’S RESPONSE DATE
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Intel Corporatiorfs response
to Plaintiffs’ complaint shall be due either (I) the earlier of 60 days after transfer of the
above·captioned case pursuant to any motion to coordinate or consolidate pre~trial
proceedings per 28 U.S.C. § 1407 or such time for response that the transferee Court may
require for any action made part of the same MDL, or, (2) 45 clays after any such motion
has been denied.
Dated: , 2005
Joseph J . Farnan, Jr., U.S.D.J.
3