Dukes et al v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Filing
1038
ORDER granting # 1037 STIPULATION MODIFYING CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE filed by Edith Arana, Christine Kwapnoski, Betty Dukes, Patricia Surgeson, Deborah Gunter (as modified). Dispositive Motions due by 4/3/2015. Responses due by 5/1/2015. Replies due by 5/15/2015. Motion Hearing set for 6/5/2015 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Pretrial Order due by 8/21/2015. Pretrial Conference set for 8/28/2015 02:30 PM before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Jury Selection/Jury Trial set for 9/8/2015 09:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer, Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 11/18/2014. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/18/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
Randy Renick [SBN 179652]
rrr@hadsellstormer.com
Cornelia Dai [SBN 207435]
cdai@hadsellstormer.com
HADSELL STORMER
& RENICK, LLP
128 N. Fair Oaks Avenue
Pasadena, California 91103
Telephone: 626.585.9600
Facsimile: 626.577.7079
Joseph M. Sellers
jsellers@cohenmilstein.com
Christine E. Webber
cwebber@cohenmilstein.com
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
West Tower, Suite 500
1100 New York Avenue
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: 202.408.4600
Facsimile: 202.408.4699
6
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
7
8
13
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
THEODORE J. BOUTROUS, JR., SBN 132099
tboutrous@gibsondunn.com
CATHERINE A. CONWAY, SBN 98366
cconway@gibsondunn.com
MICHELE L. MARYOTT, SBN 191993
mmaryott@gibsondunn.com
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Telephone:
213.229.7000
Facsimile:
213.229.7520
14
Attorneys for Defendant WAL-MART STORES, INC.
9
10
11
12
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
18
20
BETTY DUKES, PATRICIA SURGESON,
EDITH ARANA, DEBORAH GUNTER, and
CHRISTINE KWAPNOSKI, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated,
21
Plaintiffs,
19
22
23
Case No. C-01-2252-CRB
STIPULATED REQUEST AND ORDER
MODIFYING CASE MANAGEMENT
SCHEDULE
v.
WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
Defendant.
24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 01-2252-CRB
1941801.1
1
The undersigned counsel, on behalf of Plaintiffs Betty Dukes, Patricia Surgeson, Edith Arana,
2
Deborah Gunter, and Christine Kwapnoski (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-
3
Mart,” and collectively, with Plaintiffs, the “Parties”), hereby stipulate as follows:
4
RECITALS
5
6
WHEREAS the parties submitted a joint proposed order regarding case management on May
2, 2014, which was adopted by the Court on May 6, 2014 (Dkt. No. 1003);
7
WHEREAS the parties have propounded substantial supplemental and new discovery since
8
that Order was entered and resolved many differences regarding written discovery requests by
9
extensive conferences between the parties;
10
WHEREAS the parties are in the midst of the depositions of the five plaintiffs and have
11
agreed to schedule the depositions of Wal-Mart’s witnesses to avoid conflicting with the busy retail
12
holiday season, as needed;
13
WHEREAS despite the best efforts of both parties to comply with the existing case
14
management schedule, the parties will not be able to complete the discovery each has served by
15
November 21, 2014 as scheduled; and
16
WHEREAS in light of both parties’ diligence since the entry of the Court’s May 6 order, the
17
parties do not anticipate the need for substantial new written discovery. The new deadlines will allow
18
for an orderly completion of the written discovery both sides have already served, and, if necessary,
19
for follow-up discovery the parties could not have previously anticipated despite reasonable efforts to
20
complete discovery by the current deadline; and
21
22
WHEREAS no prior requests for extension have been made with respect to the merits
discovery period.
23
STIPULATION
24
25
Accordingly, the parties now jointly stipulate and respectfully request that this Court order the
following changes to the existing schedule:
26
27
Event
Date certain for Wal-Mart to provide requested
28
Current Date
--
Proposed New Date
December 12, 2015
2
STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 01-2252-CRB
1941801.1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
data to plaintiffs
Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff / Expert
Disclosures
Responsive Expert Disclosures
Dispositive Motion Deadline
Briefs in Opposition
Briefs in Reply
Proposed hearing date
Joint Proposed Pretrial Order
Pretrial Conference
Trials
November 21, 2014
February 16, 2015
December 22, 2014
January 9, 2015
February 6, 2015
February 20, 2015
March 6, 2015
May 18, 2015
May 26, 2015
June 1, 2015
March 16, 2016
April 3, 2015
May 1, 2015
May 15, 2015
June 5, 2015
August 21, 2015
August 28, 2015
September 8, 2015
8
9
10
Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2(a), the declaration of Christine E. Webber in support of this stipulation is
filed herewith.
11
12
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
13
Dated: November 17, 2014
14
15
16
17
By: /s/Christine E. Webber___________
Joseph M. Sellers
Christine E. Webber
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL,
PLLC
18
19
20
21
22
By: /s/Michele Maryott
Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. (SBN 132099)
Catherine A. Conway (SBN 98366)
Michele L. Maryott (SBN 191993)
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
Attorneys for Defendant
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
I, Christine E. Webber, attest that
concurrence in the filing of this document
has been obtained from the other
signatory.
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATED REQUEST AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 01-2252-CRB
1941801.1
1
ORDER
schedule is approved.
S
UNIT
ED
5
RT
U
O
4
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2014
ED
RDER
THE HONORABLE CHARLES R. BREYER
IS SO O
IT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
harle
Judge C
10
A
H
ER
LI
RT
9
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
CASE NO. C 01-2252-CRB
1941801.1
yer
s R. Bre
NO
8
R NIA
3
Pursuant to the above stipulation, the Stipulation and Order regarding the case management
FO
2
C
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?