Dukes et al v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Filing 825

ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE BY PLAINTIFFS. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 12/13/2012. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/13/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 No. C 01-02252 CRB DUKES, ET AL., ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE Plaintiffs, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant. / 16 17 Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”) has moved for leave to file a motion 18 for reconsideration (dkt. 822) of this Court’s order denying Wal-Mart’s Motion to Dismiss. 19 Specifically, Wal-Mart asks this Court to reconsider whether, for purposes of exhausting 20 their administrative remedies, absent class members may rely on the administrative charge 21 filed by former named plaintiff Stephanie Odle. 22 The Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to respond to Wal-Mart’s motion. In a filing of no 23 more than 12 pages, Plaintiffs shall address both whether leave should be granted to file the 24 motion as well as the merits of the proposed motion for reconsideration. Plaintiffs’ response 25 shall be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 27, 2012. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 Dated: December 13, 2012 G:\CRBALL\2001\2252\order requiring response.wpd CHARLES R. BREYER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?