Free Reply Memorandum - District Court of California - California


File Size: 15.6 kB
Pages: 2
Date: September 5, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: California
Category: District Court of California
Author: unknown
Word Count: 438 Words, 2,496 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cand/204505/14.pdf

Download Reply Memorandum - District Court of California ( 15.6 kB)


Preview Reply Memorandum - District Court of California
Case 3:08-cv-03031-JSW

Document 14

Filed 09/05/2008

Page 1 of 2

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
LIT T LE R ME NDE LSO N
A P R O F E S S I ON A L C O RP O R AT I O N 650 C a lifornia Stre e t 20th F loor Sa n F ra ncisco, C A 94108 415. 433. 1940

LINDBERGH PORTER, SBN 100091 NEVILLE F. FERNANDES, SBN 240935 LITTLER MENDELSON A Professional Corporation 650 California Street, 20th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108.2693 Telephone: 415.433.1940 Fax: 415.399.8490 Email: [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Defendants THE HEARST CORPORATION and HEARST COMMUNICATIONS, INC. dba HEARST NEWSPAPERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARSHA GINSBURG, Plaintiff, v. HEARST COMMUNICATIONS, INC.; HEARST CORPORATION; HEARST NEWSPAPERS, Defendants. Hearing Date Time: Judge: Courtroom: Complaint Filed: October 3, 2008 9:00 a.m. Hon. Jeffrey S. White 2 June 20, 2008 Case No. CV-08-3031 JSW DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

CASE NO. CV-08-3031 JSW

Case 3:08-cv-03031-JSW

Document 14

Filed 09/05/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

TO THE COURT AND ALL ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Defendants filed their moving papers related to this Motion on August 15, 2008. Plaintiff's Opposition was due on August 29, 2008 and Defendants' Reply is due today, September 5, 2008. Please take notice that, to date, no Opposition has been received by Defendants or filed on the Court's PACER database. Accordingly, Defendants will not be filing a Reply brief. As detailed in Defendants' moving papers, Plaintiff's Complaint is severely defective and must be altered so that Defendants can prepare a response. The Court should, therefore, dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint with leave to amend pursuant to Rule 41(b), or in the alternative, order Plaintiff to file a more definite statement, pursuant to Rule 12(e). Respectfully submitted, Date: September 5, 2008 By: LITTLER MENDELSON /s/ Lindbergh Porter, Jr. LINDBERGH PORTER NEVILLE F. FERNANDES Attorneys for Defendants HEARST CORPORATION AND HEARST COMMUNICATIONS, INC. dba HEARST NEWSPAPERS

Firmwide:86530528.1 052069.1010

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
LIT T LE R ME NDE LSO N
A P R O F E S S I ON A L C O RP O R AT I O N 650 C a lifornia Stre e t 20th F loor Sa n F ra ncisco, C A 94108 415. 433. 1940

DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

CASE NO. CV-08-3031 JSW

1