Delagarza et al v. Tesoro Refining & Marketing Company

Filing 212

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 211 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Continue Case Management Conference filed by Charles Grimmett, Sal Lucido, Rick Delagarza, Brian Cashwell, April Moore, Paul Gutierrez, Antonio Garcia Case Management Statement due by 5/2/2013. Further Case Management Conference set for 5/9/2013 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/6/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/6/2013)

1
2
3
4

JAY SMITH (CA Bar No. 166105)
(Email: [e-mail])
LINDA S. FANG (CA Bar No. 240245)
(Email: [e-mail])
GILBERT & SACKMAN, A Law Corporation
3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, California 90010
Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]

5
6
7
8
9

RICHARD R. ROUCO (pro hac vice)
(Email: [e-mail])
QUINN, CONNOR, WEAVER, DAVIES & ROUCO
2700 Highway 280 East, Suite 380
Birmingham, Alabama 35223
Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Rick Delagarza, Paul Gutierrez,
Sal Lucido, April Moore, Charles Grimmett, Antonio Garcia, and Brian Cashwell

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

WILLIAM DRITSAS (CA Bar No. 97523)
(Email: [e-mail])
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
560 Mission Street, 31st Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]
TIMOTHY M. RUSCHE (CA Bar No. 230036)
(Email: [e-mail])
KRISTEN M. AGNEW (CA Bar No. 247656)
(Email: [e-mail])
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
333 South Hope Street, Suite 3900
Los Angeles, California 90071
Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]

18
19

Attorneys for Defendant Tesoro Refining and
Marketing Company

20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO

22
23
24
25

RICK DELAGARZA, individually, PAUL
GUTIERREZ, SAL LUCIDO, APRIL MOORE,
CHARLES GRIMMETT, ANTONIO GARCIA,
and BRIAN CASHWELL, individually and on
behalf of all similarly situated current and former
employees,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. C 09-05803 EMC
Assigned to the Hon. Edward M. Chen
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

26
27

TESORO REFINING AND MARKETING
COMPANY and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive,

28

Defendants.

Case No. C 09-05803 EMC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE CMC

1

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-12, Plaintiffs Rick Delagarza, Paul Gutierrez, Sal Lucido, April

2

Moore, Charles Grimmett, Antonio Garcia and Brian Cashwell (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant

3

Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company (“Tesoro”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and

4

through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

5
6
7
8
9

WHEREAS, a case management conference is currently scheduled in this matter for
March 7, 2013, at 10:30 a.m.;
WHEREAS, the Parties are engaged in substantial settlement negotiations with a high
likelihood of success and hope to focus resources on settlement rather than continued litigation;
WHEREAS, The Parties participated in two all-day, private mediation sessions with

10

Mediator Mark Rudy, on October 15, 2011 and May 14, 2012. After these sessions, the Parties

11

continued to engage in settlement discussions, ultimately agreeing to the principal terms of a

12

settlement in or around July 2012;

13

WHEREAS, after reaching agreement regarding the principal terms of settlement, the

14

Parties spent considerable time and dedicated significant resources to analyzing payroll data

15

consisting of the number of 12-hour shifts worked by, and the applicable wage rates for, each

16

class member in this case (for a period covering 7 1/2 years) and in Burgess v. Tesoro Ref. &

17

Mktg. Co., USCD Case No. 10-cv-05870 DMG (PLAx) (“Burgess”) (for a period covering more

18

than 4 years) to ensure that all eligible shifts were discovered in order to make accurate

19

settlement payments to all class members;

20

WHEREAS, on August 8, 2012, the Parties consolidated this case with Burgess, which

21

involves a certified class of employees at Tesoro’s Los Angeles refinery and is pending in the

22

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California;

23

WHEREAS, after reaching the agreement in principal, the Parties also negotiated the

24

resolution of the “going forward” issues at Tesoro’s Los Angeles and Golden Eagle refineries,

25

which required the drafting and negotiation of supplemental agreements to two separate

26

collective bargaining agreements governing the terms and conditions of employment of class

27

members in this action and in Burgess, which required the participation of two local bargaining

28

committees of Plaintiffs’ labor union and Tesoro’s labor negotiators;

Case No. C 09-05803 EMC

1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE CMC

1

WHEREAS, on or about December 4, 2012, the Parties finalized and executed a

2

detailed, 13-page Memorandum of Understanding specifying the terms of the global settlement

3

of this case, Burgess, and another related action, United Steel, Paper & Forestry, Rubber, Mfg.,

4

Energy, Allied Indus. & Serv. Workers Int’l Union, AFL-CIO, CLC v. Shell Oil Co., Equilon

5

Enterp. LLC dba Shell Oil Prods. US, and Tesoro Ref. & Mktg. Co., USDC Case No. CV08-

6

3693 RGK (Ex), which is pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Case Nos.

7

11-55242 and 11-55530;

8
9

WHEREAS, on December 10 and 11, 2012, Class Counsel traveled to and held inperson meetings with class members at the Los Angeles and Golden Eagle refineries to provide

10

information and answer questions regarding the settlement and proposed modifications to the

11

collective bargaining agreements.

12

WHEREAS, during and after these meetings, dozens of class members spoke to Class

13

Counsel regarding their individual settlement data, leading Class Counsel to discover certain

14

issues with the settlement data provided by Tesoro, including a number of employees who were

15

each missing six months to a year’s worth of shift data.

16

WHEREAS, in or around December 2012 and thereafter, Class Counsel brought these

17

issues to Tesoro’s attention and, on January 18, 2013 and thereafter, Tesoro provided Class

18

Counsel with three sets of supplemental data for more than 130 class members, consisting of

19

more than 10,000 additional shifts that had been inadvertently excluded from the settlement data.

20

WHEREAS, given the discovery of these issues, the Parties were required to renegotiate

21

certain aspects of their settlement agreement, and, on or about February 15, 2013, the Parties

22

reached an agreement on the revised settlement terms.

23

WHEREAS, the Parties have requested from the Burgess court a brief, two-week

24

continuance of the briefing deadlines to revise the motion for preliminary approval and

25

supporting documents, the settlement notice, the settlement agreement, and other supplemental

26

agreements in light of the revised settlement terms and are close to finalizing these documents.

27

The Parties have not sought an extension of the discovery, pre-trial or trial deadlines in that case;

28

and

Case No. C 09-05803 EMC

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE CMC

1

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that judicial economy would be promoted by continuing

2

the case management conference until May 2, 2013, or a date thereafter that is convenient for the

3

Court.

4

THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO STIPULATE AND RESPECTFULLY

5

REQUEST THAT THE COURT ORDER that the case management conference scheduled for

6

March 7, 2013, be continued to May 2, 2013, or the soonest available date thereafter.

7
8

DATED: March 4, 2013

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

9
By

/s/ Timothy M. Rusche
Timothy M. Rusche
Kristen M. Agnew
Attorneys for Defendant
Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company

10
11
12
13

DATED: March 4, 2013

GILBERT & SACKMAN
A LAW CORPORATION

14
15
By

/s/ Linda S. Fang
Linda S. Fang
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

16
17
18

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED that the case management

19

9
conference currently set for March 7, 2013 shall be rescheduled to May ____ at 10:30 a.m.

20

TC
TE
6
TA
DATED: March ____, 2013. __________________________________
HONORABLE EDWARD M. CHEN

S

24
J

27

A

H

ER

LI

RT

26

. Chen

ward M
udge Ed

NO

25

R NIA

23

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

FO

UNIT
ED

22

RT
U
O

21

S DISTRIC

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

28

Case No. C 09-05803 EMC

3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE CMC

1
ATTESTATION
2
3
4

I, Linda S. Fang, am the ECF user whose ID and password were used to file the above
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference. In accordance with
the Northern District of California’s General Order 45, X.B and Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I
hereby attest that I have obtained concurrence in the filing of this document from the other
signatory in this document.

5
/s/ Linda S. Fang
Linda S. Fang

6
7
8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
9
I, Linda S. Fang, certify that on March 4, 2013, the foregoing document entitled:
10
11
12
13
14

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
was filed electronically in the Court’s ECF; thereby upon completion the ECF system
automatically generated a “Notice of Electronic Filing” as service through CM/ECF to registered
e-mail addresses of parties of record in the case, in particular on the following:
Timothy M. Rusche
[e-mail]

15
16

William Dritsas
[e-mail]

17

Kristen M. Agnew
[e-mail]

18
19

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March 4, 2013, at Los Angeles, California.

20

/s/ Linda S. Fang
Linda S. Fang

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case No. C 09-05803 EMC

3
ATTESTATION AND CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE