Francisco Nieves Reyes v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. et al

Filing 29

Stipulation Re: Modification of Litigation Schedule and Order Thereon signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/20/2015. (Yu, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Gregory N. Karasik (SBN 115834)
Karasik Law Firm
11835 W. Olympic Blvd. Ste. 1275
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]
Sahag Majarian II – State Bar No. 146621
Law Office of Sahag Majarian II
18250 Ventura Boulevard
Tarzana, California 91356 

Tel: [phone]; Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FRANCISCO NIEVES REYES

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10
11
12

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
FRANCISCO NIEVES REYES, individually
and on behalf of other persons similarly
situated,

13

Plaintiffs,

14
15
16

Case No. 1:14-CV-00964 MJS
STIPULATION RE MODIFICATION OF
LITIGATION SCHEDULE and ORDER
THEREON

vs.
CVS PHARMACY, INC.; CAREMARK RX
LLC; and DOES 1 through 10.
Defendants.

17
18
19
20
21

Plaintiff Francisco Nieves Reyes (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants CVS Pharmacy, Inc. and CVS

22

Caremark Corporation (erroneously sued as Caremark RX LLC) (“Defendants”), by and through their

23

respective counsel of record, hereby enter into the following Stipulation re Modification of Litigation

24

Schedule.

25
26
27
28

STIPULATION
1.

On September 12, 2014, the Court issued an order establishing the following schedule

with respect to Plaintiff’s anticipated motion for class certification:
Filing Deadline

March 16, 2015
1
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE MODIFICATION OF LITIGATION SCHEDULE

1

Opposition Due

April 16, 2015

2

Reply Due

April 30, 2015

3

Hearing Date

June 5, 2015

4

2.

Despite trying to complete class certification related discovery with diligence, the

5

parties have encountered unexpected delays. Among other reasons preventing completion of class

6

related discovery sooner, Defendants were not able to provide Plaintiff with sampling information until

7

around December 23, 2014 and, due to scheduling conflicts, pmk depositions were only recently

8

scheduled to be taken on March 23, 2015 (in Los Angeles) and April 8, 2015 (in Boston).

9

3.

In addition to needing more time to complete discovery, the parties have been meeting

10

and conferring about the possibility of participating in a private mediation, and wish to have more time

11

to fully explore that possibility before having to incur further litigation expenses.

12
13

4.

In light of the above, the parties mutually request that all of the dates with respect to

Plaintiff’s anticipated motion for class certification be extended by eight weeks, as follows:

14

Filing Deadline

May 11, 2015

15

Opposition Due

June 11, 2015

16

Reply Due

June 25, 2015

17

Hearing Date

July 31, 2015

18
19

Dated: February 20, 2015

KARASIK LAW FIRM

20
By

21
22
23

Dated: February 20, 2015

/s/ Gregory N. Karasik
Gregory N. Karasik
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP

24
25
26

By

/s/ Jennifer B. Zargarof
Jennifer B. Zargarof
Attorneys for Defendants

27
28
2
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE MODIFICATION OF LITIGATION SCHEDULE

1
ORDER

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Good cause having been shown, the foregoing stipulation in case number 1:14-CV-00964 MJS
is hereby approved. The litigation schedule for Plaintiff’s class certification motion is modified to the
following:
Filing Deadline

May 11, 2015

Opposition Due

June 11, 2015

Reply Due

June 25, 2015

Hearing Date

July 31, 2015

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
12
13

Dated:

February 20, 2015

/s/

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE MODIFICATION OF LITIGATION SCHEDULE