Gallion v. Apple, Inc

Filing 66

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Jointly filed by Charlene Gallion. (Fazio, Jeffrey) (Filed on 3/16/2012)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 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 Interim Co-Lead Class Counsel (Additional Counsel Listed at End of Document) 15 Penelope A. Preovolos (87607) (ppreovolos@mofo.com) Andrew D. Muhlbach (175694) (amuhlbach@mofo.com) Heather A. Moser (212686) (hmoser@mofo.com) Samuel J. Boone Lunier (252732) (slunier@mofo.com) MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 T: 415-268-7000 F: 415-268-7522 16 Attorneys for Defendant Apple, Inc. 12 13 14 17 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 19 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 20 21 IN RE APPLE IPHONE/IPOD WARRANTY LITIGATION 22 This Document Relates To: 23 All Actions 24 25 26 27 28 No. 10-CV-01610 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT DATE: March 22, 2012 TIME: 9:00 a.m. COURTROOM: 3 TRIAL DATE: Not set 1 2 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-10(d), the parties respectfully submit this Joint Case Management Conference Statement. 3 Plaintiffs’ Statement: 4 The original complaint in Gallion v. Apple, Inc., No. 10-CV-01610, was filed 5 in this Court on April 15, 2010, and was later consolidated with two related 6 actions, Corsi v. Apple, Inc., No. 10-CV-03316, and Calix v. Apple, Inc., No. 10-CV- 7 05895, each of which proposed a nationwide class of consumers who had purchased 8 an original iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, and/or iPod touch device (“Class 9 Devices”). Another, related action had been filed in the Santa Clara County 10 Superior Court, Pennington, et al. v. Apple, Inc., No. 1-10-CV-162659, which 11 proposed a class composed of California residents who had purchased a Class 12 Device. 13 In each of these actions (collectively, the “Actions”), the plaintiffs alleged 14 that Apple had a policy of denying warranty claims on the ground that Class 15 Devices had been damaged by liquid based solely on a Liquid Contact Indicator 16 (“LCI”) that had turned pink or red, without inspecting Class Devices for evidence 17 of actual damage by liquid. Plaintiffs also alleged that because Apple relied on a 18 provision in its warranties by which coverage is excluded if the consumer causes 19 damage, Apple bore the burden of proving that the Class Devices had actually been 20 damaged by the consumer, and that Apple could not carry that burden because 21 LCIs are inherently incapable of establishing that a Class Device had been 22 damaged and because Apple failed to maintain records of the majority of these 23 warranty transactions in any event. Apple has answered each of the complaints 24 and has denied all claims of liability. 25 After nearly two years of extensive discovery that included the production of 26 hundreds of thousands of documents by Apple and by third parties (3M Company, 27 the inventor of the material Apple used for the LCIs, and AT&T Wireless 28 Corporation, which sold and provided wireless service for the iPhone), and the -1JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT (CASE NO. 10-CV-01610) 1 depositions of witnesses employed by Apple and 3M, the parties have engaged in a 2 series of mediation sessions before Retired Magistrate Judge Edward Infante and 3 Catherine Yanni of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service (“JAMS”). 4 Plaintiffs will attend the next mediation session on April 13, 2012, if 5 certain conditions have been met. Plaintiffs believe there are issues that would 6 benefit from the Court’s assistance and are prepared to discuss the status of the 7 litigation in detail, including the status of the parties’ mediation efforts in 8 chambers, assuming that Apple agrees to do so notwithstanding the mediation 9 privilege. 10 11 Defendant’s Statement: 12 Given that the parties have attended several productive mediation sessions 13 and another session is scheduled for April 13, Apple sees no purpose to be served by 14 responding to plaintiffs’ statements respecting the merits (Apple’s view of the case 15 is set forth in prior case management conference statements). 16 mediation is ongoing, Apple does not believe it is appropriate to waive the 17 mediation privilege. Apple does not believe there are issues to be addressed by the 18 Court at this time, but of course will be prepared to address any issues that the 19 Court may wish to discuss. 20 DATED: March 16, 2012 21 22 23 24 25 26 FAZIO | MICHELETTI LLP by /s/ Jeffrey L. Fazio Jeffrey L. Fazio (146043) Dina E. Micheletti (184141) FAZIO | MICHELETTI LLP 2410 Camino Ramon, Suite 315 San Ramon, CA 94583 Telephone: 925-543-2555 Facsimile: 925-369-0344 27 28 -2JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT (CASE NO. 10-CV-01610) Because the 1 4 Steven A. Schwartz (pro hac vice) Timothy N. Mathews (pro hac vice) CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP 361 W. Lancaster Avenue Haverford, PA 19041 Telephone: 610-642-8500 Facsimile: 610- 649-3633 5 Interim Co-Lead Class Counsel 6 Kimberly A. Kralowec (163158) Elizabeth Newman (257329) THE KRALOWEC LAW GROUP 188 The Embarcadero, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 415-546-6800 Facsimile: 415-546-6801 2 3 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Earl L. Bohachek (55476) LAW OFFICES OF EARL L. BOHACHEK One Maritime Plaza San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415-434-8100 Facsimile: 415-781-1034 Rose F. Luzon (221544) James C. Shah (260435) SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP 401 West A Street Suite 2350 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 235-2416 Philip Bohrer Scott E. Brady BOHRER LAW FIRM, L.L.C. 8712 Jefferson Highway, Suite B Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70809 Telephone: (225) 925-5297 Facsimile: (225) 231-7000 25 John P. Wolff, III Christopher K. Jones KEOGH, COX & WILSON 701 Main Street Post Office Box 1151 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70821 Telephone: (225) 383-3796 Facsimile: (225) 343-9612 26 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 22 23 24 27 28 -3JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT (CASE NO. 10-CV-01610) 1 DATED: March 16, 2012 Penelope A. Preovolos Andrew D. Muhlbach MORRISON | FOERSTER LLP 2 3 by/s/ Penelope A. Preovolos Penelope A. Preovolos 4 5 Attorneys for Defendant, Apple Inc. 6 7 ATTESTATION OF FILER 8 9 I, Jeffrey L. Fazio, hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this 10 document has been obtained from each of the other signatories. See N.D. Cal. Gen. 11 Order No. 45 ¶ X(B). 12 13 14 15 Dated: March 16, 2012 FAZIO MICHELETTI LLP by: /s/ Jeffey Fazio Jeffrey L. Fazio 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 –5– JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT (CASE NO. 10-CV-01610)