Juarez et al v. Jani-King of California, Inc. et al

Filing 111

STIPULATION AND ORDER Status Conference set for 11/19/10 is continued to 1/21/2011 10:00 AM in Courtroom 1, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 11/16/10. (tdm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2010)

Download PDF
Juarez et al v. Jani-King of California, Inc. et al Doc. 111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHITNEY HUSTON (SBN 234863) (whuston@sturdevantlaw.com) THE STURDEVANT LAW FIRM A Professional Corporation 354 Pine Street, Fourth Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 477-2410 Facsimile: (415) 477-2420 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Putative Class BENJAMIN K. RILEY (SBN 112007) (rileyb@howrey.com) BARTKO, ZANKEL, TARRANT & MILLER 900 Front Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 956-1900 Facsimile: (415) 956-1152 Attorneys for Defendants Jani-King of California, Inc. Jani-King, Inc., and Jani-King International, Inc. (Additional counsel listed on signature page) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ALEJANDRO JUAREZ, MARIA JUAREZ, LUIS A. ROMERO, and MARIA PORTILLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. JANI-KING OF CALIFORNIA, INC., a Texas Corporation; JANI-KING, INC., a Texas Corporation; JANI-KING INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Texas corporation; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants. Case No. CV09-03495 SC CLASS ACTION STIPULATION PER LOCAL RULE 6-2 AND [Proposed] ORDER TO VACATE OR CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE STATUS CONFERENCE CASE NO. CV09-03495 SC Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION Plaintiffs ALEJANDRO JUAREZ, MARIA JUAREZ, LUIS A. ROMERO, and MARIA PORTILLO ("Plaintiffs") and Defendants JANI-KING OF CALIFORNIA, INC., JANI-KING, INC., and JANI-KING INTERNATIONAL, INC. ("Defendants") (collectively, the "Parties"), through their counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that: WHEREAS, on September 24, 2010, the Court entered its Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify the Class [Dkt. No. 93], denying Plaintiffs' initial Motion to Certify Class and ordering Plaintiffs to file an Amended Motion to Certify Class (the "Amended Motion") no later than October 8, 2010, with a hearing set on the Amended Motion for December 3, 2010; WHEREAS, on October 8, 2010, Plaintiffs filed their Amended Motion; WHEREAS, as required by the Local Rules, Defendants intend to file their Opposition papers to the Amended Motion on or before November 12, 2010, and Plaintiffs intend to file their Reply papers on or before November 19, 2010; WHEREAS, after the filing of the papers in support and opposition to the Amended Motion, the parties intend to prepare for and argue the Amended Motion at the hearing set by this Court for December 3, 2010; WHEREAS on November 9, 2010, the Court issued a Clerk's Notice setting this matter for a Status Conference on Friday, November 19, 2010, at 10 a.m. [Dkt. No. 106]; WHEREAS, in the interest of judicial economy and so that the parties may complete their briefing and argument of the pending Amended Motion, the parties propose that the Status Conference set for November 19, 2010, either be vacated to be reset approximately 30 days after the Court issues its ruling on the Amended Motion, or in the alternative, be continued to coincide with the hearing on the Amended Motion on December 3, 2010. ACCORDINGLY, based on the foregoing, the parties hereby stipulate and propose to the Court that the Status Conference set for November 19, 2010, be vacated or continued to December 3, 2010. 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE STATUS CONFERENCE CASE NO. CV09 08-03495 SC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO STIPULATED. DATED: November 11, 2010 THE STURDEVANT LAW FIRM A Professional Corporation By: /s/ Whitney Huston WHITNEY HUSTON Attorneys for Plaintiffs ALEJANDRO JUAREZ, MARIA JUAREZ, LUIS A. ROMERO, and MARIA PORTILLO DATED: November 11, 2010 BARTKO, ZANKEL, TARRANT & MILLER By: /s/ Benjamin K. Riley BENJAMIN K. RILEY Attorneys for Defendants JANI-KING OF CALIFORNIA, INC., JANI-KING, INC., and JANI-KING INTERNATIONAL, INC. [PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED that the Status Conference set for November 19, 2010 is hereby vacated [is continued until December 3, 2010]. January 21, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. UNIT ED DATED: November 16, 2011 ER N F D IS T IC T O R 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE STATUS CONFERENCE CASE NO. CV09 08-03495 SC A C LI FO Judge S amuel C onti R NIA The HonorableO ORDERConti Samuel ED IT IS S United States District Court Judge NO S ISTRIC ES D TC AT T RT U O RT H 1 2 For Plaintiffs and the Putative Class: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE STATUS CONFERENCE CASE NO. CV09 08-03495 SC Additional Counsel MARK TALAMANTES (SBN 187961) (mark@e-licenciados.com) JENNIFER A. REISCH (SBN 223671) (jennifer@e-licenciados.com) TALAMANTES VILLEGAS CARRERA, LLP San Francisco, California 94133 170 Columbus Ave, Suite 300 Telephone: (415) 989-8000 Facsimile: (415) 989-8028 SHANNON LISS-RIORDAN (BBO #640716) (Pro Hac Vice) (sliss@llrlaw.com) HILLARY SCHWAB (BBO #666029) (Pro Hac Vice) (hschwab@llrlaw.com) LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 100 Cambridge Street, 20th Floor Boston, MA 02114 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 Facsimile: (617) 994-5801 For Defendants Jani-King of California, Inc., et al.: KERRY L. BUNDY (MN Bar No. 266917) (Pro Hac Vice) (kbundy@faegre.com) AARON VAN OORT (MN Bar No. 315539) (Pro Hac Vice) (avanoort@faegre.com) EILEEN M. HUNTER (MN Bar No. 336336) (Pro Hac Vice) (ehunter@haegre.com) FAEGRE & BENSON, LLP 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 766-7000 Facsimile: (612) 766-1600

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?