Zeisel v. Diamond Foods, Inc.

Filing 212

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT TO ADDRESS NEW LAW. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 1/30/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2012)

Case3:10-cv-01192-JSW Document209-1 Filed01/24/12 Page1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Jeffrey J. Lederman (SBN: 104622)
[e-mail]
Jeffrey S. Bosley (SBN: 167629)
[e-mail]
Amanda L. Groves (SBN: 187216)
[e-mail]
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5802
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
DIAMOND FOODS, INC.

101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5802

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10
Winston & Strawn LLP

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12
13
14
15
16

ELLIOT ZEISEL, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.

17

DIAMOND FOODS, INC., a Delaware
corporation,

18

Defendant.

19

Case No. 3:10-cv-01192 JSW (EDL)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING IN
PART AND DENYING IN PART
PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF
PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION
FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF
CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT TO
ADDRESS NEW LAW

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS
ACTION SETTLEMENT -- CASE NO. 3:10-CV-01192 JSW (EDL)

Case3:10-cv-01192-JSW Document209-1 Filed01/24/12 Page2 of 2

1

Having considered: (a) Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental

2

Brief in Support of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action

3

Settlement to Address New Law (“Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion”); (b) the Declaration of Joseph

4

N. Kravec, Jr. in Support of Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Brief

5

in Support of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement to

6

Address New Law; and (c) Defendant Diamond Foods, Inc.’s Response Pursuant to Civil Local Rule

7

7-11 Regarding Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Brief in Support

8

of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement to Address

9

New Law, the Court rules as follows:

101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5802

Winston & Strawn LLP

10
11
12
13

1.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion is GRANTED IN

PART AND DENIED IN PART.
2.

Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion is GRANTED to the extent it seeks leave to file a

15

supplemental brief regarding the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co.,
and to bring to the Court's attention Sullivan v.
DB
Inc., --- F. 3d ---, 2012 WL 89176 (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2012). Investments, _F.3d_, 2011 WL 6367740 (3rd
Cir. December 20, 2011).
3.
Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion is DENIED to the extent it seeks leave to file a

16

supplemental brief regarding amendment of the operative complaint.

14

17

4.

Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief in Support of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for

18

Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement to Address New Law attached to Plaintiff’s

19

Administrative Motion as Exhibit 1 (“Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief”) is hereby deemed filed, in

20

part. Certain portions of Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief do not address the extent the Mazza opinion

21

does or does not impact certification of the proposed settlement class, and instead addresses

22

proposed amendments to the operative complaint. These arguments, at page 3, line 11 through page

23

4, line 16 (including footnote 1) and page 4, line 20 beginning with the word “If” through page 4,

24

line 22, are inappropriate at this stage, and are deemed stricken from Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

January 30, 2012
Dated: _______________

________________________________
The Honorable Jeffrey S. White
United States District Judge

27
28
1

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS
ACTION SETTLEMENT -- CASE NO. 3:10-CV-01192 JSW (EDL)