Roling v. E*Trade Securities LLC
Filing
89
AMENDED ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES re 88 Stipulation and Order, Motions due by 2/10/2012.. Signed by Judge EDWARD M. CHEN on 10/28/11. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/28/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Sean Reis (SBN 184044)
Edelson McGuire, LLP
30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300
Rancho Santa Margarita, California 92688
Tel: (949) 459-2124
Fax: (949) 459-2123
sreis@edelson.com
Rafey S. Balabanian (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Steven L. Lezell (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Ari J. Scharg (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Edelson McGuire, LLC
350 North LaSalle, Suite 1300
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Tel: (312) 589-6370
Fax: (312) 589-6378
rbalabanian@edelson.com
slezell@edelson.com
ascharg@edelson.com
12
13
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
15
16
JOSEPH ROLING and ALEXANDER
LANDVATER, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated,
The Honorable Edward M. Chen
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No.: 3:10-cv-00488-EMC
Plaintiffs,
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY
DEADLINES
v.
E*TRADE SECURITIES LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, and DOES 1-50,
inclusive,
Defendants.
AMENDED ORDER
1
Plaintiffs Joseph Roling and Alexander Landvater (collectively “Plaintiffs”), and
2
Defendant E*TRADE Securities, LLC (“E*TRADE”) (Plaintiffs and E*TRADE are collectively
3
referred to as the “Parties”), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 and L.R. 7-12, hereby stipulate and
4
agree to extend the class discovery deadline by sixty (60) days, and modify the Discovery Plan.
5
(Dkt. No. 69.) In support of their Stipulation, the Parties state as follows:
6
7
1.
lawsuit against E*Trade Securities LLC on February 3, 2010. (Dkt. No. 1.)
8
9
10
Plaintiffs Joseph Roling and Alexander Landvater filed this putative class action
2.
As set forth in the Revised Discovery Plan, which was approved by the Court on
February 2, 2011, discovery in this matter has been bifurcated into class and merits phases, with
class discovery closing on November 1, 2011. (Dkt. No. 69.)
11
3.
Good cause exists to extend the class discovery period by sixty (60) days. This
12
case concerns a putative class that is potentially comprised of millions customers. As such, the
13
Parties have exchanged thousands of documents relating to customer contracts and agreements
14
dating back to 2001, and are still in the process of producing relevant documents. Additionally,
15
several depositions still need to be taken, and Plaintiffs just received on Friday, October 14, firm
16
dates for certain Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses of E*Trade.
17
4.
Extending the discovery cut-off date by sixty (60) days will allow the Parties to
18
finish taking depositions, and also to issue any follow up discovery that may be necessary after
19
the depositions have been taken.
20
5.
The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of
21
litigation.” Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002). The
22
court may modify the discovery deadline only for good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Zivkovic,
23
302 F.3d at 1087. Good cause to extend a deadline exists when the deadline “cannot reasonably
24
be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Fed. R. Civ. P 16 Advisory
25
Comm. Notes (1983 Am.); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir.
26
1992).
27
28
6.
The Parties have been diligently engaged in discovery in this matter, and the
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
2
CASE NO. 3:10-CV-00488-EMC
1
requested extension will not prejudice either party. The Parties do not anticipate any future
2
extensions or modification of the Discovery Plan currently in place.
3
7.
4
purposes of delay.
5
This Stipulation, and the requested extension sought herein, is not brought for the
NOW THEREFORE, the Parties hereby, STIPULATE and AGREE, subject to Court
6
approval, that the Court extend the class discovery deadline by sixty (60) days, and modify the
7
Discovery Plan as follows:
8
a.
b.
Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Motion
for Class Certification:
February 17, 2012
c.
Defendant’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’
Motion for Class Certification:
23
March 30, 2012
d.
Plaintiffs’ Reply In Support of their
Motion for Class Certification:
13
April 20, 2012
e.
Hearing on the Motion for Class Certification:
May 4, 2012
f.
Second Phase Discovery Cutoff:
August 7, 2012 or 3 months
following ruling on Class Cert.,
whichever is later
g.
9
First Phase Discovery Cutoff:
Deadline for Dispositive Motions:
October 8, 2012 or 60 days
following close of merits
discovery, whichever is later
10
11
12
13
January 3, 2012
10
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
3
CASE NO. 3:10-CV-00488-EMC
1
Respectfully submitted,
2
3
Dated: October 18, 2011
4
By:/s/ Rafey S. Balabanian
One of Plaintiffs’ attorneys
5
6
Rafey S. Balabanian (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Edelson McGuire, LLC
350 North LaSalle, Suite 1300
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Tel: (312) 589-6370
rbalabanian@edelson.com
7
8
9
10
11
JOSEPH ROLING and ALEXANDER
LANDVATER, individually and on behalf
of a class of similarly situated individuals,
Dated: October 18, 2011
12
E*TRADE SECURITIES, LLC,
By:/s/ Whitty Somvichian
Whitty Somvichian(194463)
Cooley LLP
101 California Street, Fifth Floor
San Francisco, California 94111-5800
Tel: (415) 693-2000
wsomvichian@cooley.com
13
14
15
16
Douglas P. Lobel (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
11951 Freedom Drive
Reston, Virginia 20190
Tel: (703) 456-8000
dlobel@cooley.com
17
18
19
20
21
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: (revised on page 3)
23
S DISTRIC
27
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
4
hen
rd M. C
ge Edwa CASE NO. 3:10-CV-00488-EMC
Jud
NO
28
D
RDERE
S SO O IED
IT I
DIF
AS MO
RT
FO
26
H
ER
A
25
LI
UNIT
ED
S
24
RT
U
O
E
TC
______________________________________
AT
T
HONORABLE EDWARD M. CHEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
R NIA
22
N
OF
C
1
2
3
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Rafey S. Balabanian, an attorney, certify that, on October 18, 2011, I caused the above
and foregoing Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines, to be filed with the Clerk of the Court
and transmitted by electronic mail to all counsel of record via the Court’s CM/ECF electronic
filing system, on this the 18th day of October, 2011.
5
/s/ Rafey S. Balabanian
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
5
CASE NO. 3:10-CV-00488-EMC
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
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?