Gallion v. Apple, Inc

Filing 47

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING SCHEDULE GOVERNING MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/19/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2011)

Download PDF
*E-Filed 4/20/11* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Jeffrey L. Fazio (146043) (jlf@fazmiclaw.com) Dina E. Micheletti (184141) (dem@fazmiclaw.com) FAZIO | MICHELETTI LLP 2410 Camino Ramon, Suite 315 San Ramon, CA 94583 T: 925-543-2555 F: 925-369-0344 Steven A. Schwartz (pro hac vice) (SAS@chimicles.com) Timothy N. Mathews (pro hac vice) (TNM@chimicles.com) CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP 361 W. Lancaster Avenue Haverford, PA 19041 T: 610-642-8500 F: 610-649-3633 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Charlene Gallion and Christoper Corsi, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 14 15 In re Apple iPhone/iPod Warranty Litigation . . . . No. CV 10-01610-RS STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING SCHEDULE GOVERNING MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION 16 17 18 19 20 21 . . 22 . . 23 24 25 . . 26 . 27 . 28 Hon. Richard Seeborg 1 2 Pursuant to the Court's instructions, the parties have met and conferred to establish a class-certification briefing schedule. Having done so, the parties hereby stipulate as follows: 3 4 5 1. Plaintiffs Gallion, Corsi, and Calix (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) will file their motion for class certification on or before October 21, 2011. 6 7 2. In the event Plaintiffs submit testimony in support of their opening brief, 8 Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) shall file its opposition to the motion for class certification on 9 December 23, 2011, so as to provide Apple with sufficient opportunity to depose Plaintiffs' 10 declarants about the matters set forth in their declarations, to the extent those declarants have not 11 already been deposed about those matters. If Plaintiffs do not submit testimony in support of 12 their opening brief, Apple’s opposition papers shall be due November 23, 2011. 13 14 3. In the event Apple submits testimony in support of its opposition brief and 15 Plaintiffs have submitted testimony in support of their opening brief, Plaintiffs’ reply papers 16 shall be filed on February 24, 2012, so as to provide Plaintiffs with sufficient opportunity to 17 depose Apple’s declarants about the matters set forth in their declarations, to the extent those 18 declarants have not already been deposed about those matters. If Apple submits testimony in 19 support of its opposition brief, but Plaintiffs have not submitted testimony in support of their 20 opening brief, Plaintiffs' reply brief shall be due January 24, 2012. If Apple does not submit 21 testimony in support of its opposition brief, but Plaintiffs have submitted testimony in support of 22 their opening brief, Plaintiffs' reply brief shall be due January 24, 2012. If neither party submits 23 testimony in support of the opening and opposition briefs, Plaintiffs’ reply brief shall be due 24 December 23, 2011. 25 26 27 4. Plaintiffs shall have the opportunity to submit expert rebuttal testimony in support of their reply brief. 28 -1STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE SCHEDULE GOVERNING MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION NO. CV-10-01610 1 2 5. The hearing date for Plaintiffs’ class-certification motion shall be set on or about the time Plaintiffs file their reply brief. 3 4 The current schedule is based on the parties’ understanding that Apple will complete its 5 initial document production by the end of June, 2011; that no substantial follow-up discovery or 6 modifications to the key-word searches that informed Apple’s discovery efforts will be necessary 7 in order to draft Plaintiffs' class-certification brief; that the schedules of counsel and various 8 witnesses will allow for the taking of depositions following the completion of Apple’s initial 9 document production; and that Plaintiffs will be able to obtain necessary third-party discovery 10 prior to the filing of their motion for class certification. In the event circumstances warrant it, 11 this schedule is subject to modification. 12 Respectfully submitted, 13 DATED: March 29, 2011 Jeffrey L. Fazio Dina E. Micheletti FAZIO | MICHELETTI LLP 14 Kimberly A. Kralowec Elizabeth Newman THE KRALOWEC LAW GROUP LLP 15 16 Earl L. Bohachek THE LAW OFFICES OF EARL L. BOHACHEK 17 18 by 19 /s/ Dina E. Micheletti Dina E. Micheletti Attorneys for Plaintiff, Charlene Gallion, on behalf of herself and the proposed class, and Interim Co-Lead Class Counsel 20 21 22 23 DATED: March 29, 2011 24 Steven A. Schwartz Timothy N. Matthews CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP 25 26 Rose F. Luzon James C. Shah SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP 27 28 -2STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE SCHEDULE GOVERNING MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION NO. CV-10-01610 by 1 /s/ Steven A. Schwartz Steven A. Schwartz 2 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Christopher Corsi, on behalf of himself and the proposed class, and Interim Co-Lead Class Counsel 3 4 5 DATED: March 29, 2011 Philip Bohrer Scott E. Brady BOHRER LAW FIRM L.L.C. 6 John P. Wolff, III Christopher K. Jones KEOGH, COX & WILSON 7 8 9 by 10 /s/ Scott E. Brady Scott E. Brady 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Daniel Calix on behalf of himself and the proposed class 12 13 DATED: March 29, 2011 14 15 Penelope A. Preovolos Andrew D. Muhlbach Heather A. Moser Samuel J. Boone Lunier MORRISON | FOERSTER LLP 16 by /s/ Andrew D. Muhlbach Andrew D. Muhlbach 17 Attorneys for Defendant, Apple, Inc. 18 19 20 ORDER 21 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 22 23 24 Dated: 4/19/11 The Honorable Richard Seeborg United States District Judge 25 26 27 28 -3STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE SCHEDULE GOVERNING MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION NO. CV-10-01610