[PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. CV 07-04486 SBA
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
DONALD M. FALK (SBN 150256)
dfalk@mayerbrown.com
RENA CHNG (SBN 209665)
rchng@mayerbrown.com
MAYER BROWN LLP
Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300
3000 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112
Telephone: (650) 331-2000
Facsimile: (650) 331-2060
VICTORIA R. COLLADO (pro hac vice)
vcollado@mayerbrown.com
SARAH E. REYNOLDS (pro hac vice)
sreynolds@mayerbrown.com
MAYER BROWN LLP
71 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 701-0700
Facsimile: (312) 701-7711
Attorneys for Defendant AT&T MOBILITY LLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION
ZOLTAN STIENER and YNEZ STIENER,
Plaintiffs,
v.
APPLE COMPUTER, INC., AT&T MOBILITY,
LLC, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants.
Case No.: C 07-04486 SBA
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Before the Court is defendant AT&T Mobility LLC’s (“ATTM”) administrative motion to
stay its obligations under the scheduling order currently in effect, pending resolution of ATTM’s
motion to stay these proceedings during the appeal of this Court’s denial of ATTM’s motion to
compel arbitration. For the reasons that follow, the administrative stay motion is GRANTED.
Background
In June 2007, plaintiffs Zoltan and Ynez Stiener purchased two iPhones. In August 2007,
the Stieners filed this putative class action against Apple Computer, Inc (“Apple”) and ATTM.
Stiener et al v. Apple, Inc. et al
Doc. 67
Dockets.Justia.com
- 2 -
[PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. CV 07-04486 SBA
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
See Docket No. 1. They allege that defendants violated California consumer-protection statutes
and a variety of common-law doctrines by “failing to inform a nationwide group of initial
purchasers of the iPhone cellular telephone that fees of over $100 would be required to replace
the iPhone battery and maintain service while the battery was being replaced.” Docket No. 1
(Compl. ¶ 1). The plaintiffs maintain that Apple an