Margie Daniel et al v. Ford Motor Company

Filing 149

ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 5/9/17l, ORDERING that Plaintiffs' 147 Request for an Extension of Time to Complete Class Notice is hereby GRANTED. The time to complete notice is EXTENDED up to and including 5/26/17 and the opt-out period is EXTENDED to 6/26/17. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 John B. Thomas (Bar No. 269538) jthomas@hicks-thomas.com Hicks Thomas LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 Facsimile: (916) 691-3261 J. Allen Carney (pro hac vice) acarney@cbplaw.com Hank Bates (Bar No. 167688) hbates@cbplaw.com Carney Bates & Pulliam, PLLC 2800 Cantrell Road, Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Telephone: (501) 312-8500 Facsimile: (501) 312-8505 Counsel for Plaintiff MARGIE DANIEL 13 14 15 16 HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 12 HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION 17 MARGIE DANIEL, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, 18 Plaintiff, 19 20 v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, 21 Defendant. 22 23 24 25 26 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 2:11-cv-02890-WBS-EFB ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLETE CLASS NOTICE 27 28 {00180614.DOCX} 1 Order Granting Plaintiff’s Unopposed Request for Extension of Time to Complete Class Notice 1 10, 2017, this Court issued an Order approving class notice and the notice plan proposed by 4 Plaintiff (Doc. 142). During the process of obtaining current addresses for Class Members, 5 Plaintiff was notified that the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) required a 6 court order specifically ordering the release of the requested information for the purpose of 7 disseminating notice to the Class. On April 14, 2017, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Unopposed 8 Request for Amendment of Order Approving Class Notice and Notice Plan (Doc. 144) and 9 entered an order amending its February 10, 2017 order (the “Amended Order”). The Amended 10 Order was submitted to the DMV. The DMV has not yet released the data; therefore, Plaintiff 11 has requested this extension of time to complete notice by May 26, 2017, extending the opt-out 12 13 HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 3 HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 (the “Parties”) were given until May 8, 2017 to complete class notice and opt out. On February HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 Pursuant to the Court’s Status Order dated November 8, 2016, Plaintiff and Defendant 2 HICKS THOMAS LLP 8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 172 Sacramento, California 95826 Telephone: (916) 388-0833 1 period to June 26, 2017. Defendant Ford Motor Company does not oppose this request. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Request for an Extension of Time to 14 Complete Class Notice is hereby GRANTED. The time to complete notice is extended up to and 15 including May 26, 2017 and the opt-out period is extended to June 26, 2017. 16 Dated: May 9, 2017. 17 18 19 Respectfully submitted, /s/ John Thomas John B. Thomas Hicks Thomas LLP 20 J. Allen Carney Hank Bates Carney Bates & Pulliam PLLC 21 Counsel for Plaintiff MARGIE DANIEL 22 SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: May 9, 2017 24 25 26 27 28 {00180614.DOCX} 2 Order Granting Plaintiff’s Unopposed Request for Extension of Time to Complete Class Notice 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?