Robles v. Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc.

Filing 86

ORDER STAYING LITIGATION PENDING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT; DIRECTIONS TO PARTIES. This litigation shall be stayed for a period of 45 days from the date of this order. The parties are directed to file, no later than July 13, 2012, a Joint Status Report , said deadline to stand vacated without further order of the Court in the event plaintiffs have filed, on or before July 13, 2012, a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on May 30, 2012. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/30/2012)

SEAN REIS (SBN 184004)

1 [e-mail]
2 EDELSON MCGUIRE LLP

30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300
3 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
Telephone: [phone]
4 Facsimile: [phone]

5 RYAN D. ANDREWS (Pro Hac Vice)
6 [e-mail]
EDELSON MCGUIRE, LLC
7 350 North LaSalle, Suite 1300
Chicago, IL 60654
8 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

9

10 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14 JUVENAL ROBLES and ABEL FIGUEROA,
individually and on behalf of a class of
15 similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiffs,

16
17

v.

Case No. 10-cv-04846 MMC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER STAYING LITIGATION
PENDING CLASS ACTION
SETTLEMENT ; DIRECTIONS TO
PARTIES

18 LUCKY BRAND DUNGAREES, INC., a
Delaware corporation, KIRSHENBAUM

19 BOND SENECAL & PARTNERS LLC f/k/a

The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney

KIRSHENBAUM BOND & PARTNERS

20 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
21 d/b/a Lime Public Relations + Promotion, and
KIRSHENBAUM BOND & PARTNERS

22 WEST LLC, a Delaware limited liability
23
24

company,
Defendants.

25
26
27
28
STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION

KIRSHENBAUM

BOND

SENECAL

&

1 PARTNERS LLC f/k/a KIRSHENBAUM
2 BOND & PARTNERS LLC, a Delaware

limited liability company, d/b/a Lime Public
3 Relations + Promotion, and KIRSHENBAUM
BOND & PARTNERS WEST LLC, a
4 Delaware limited liability company,

5
6

Third-Party Plaintiffs.
v.

7
8

MERKLE INC., a Maryland Corporation,

9

Third-Party Defendant
Fourth-Party Plaintiff.

10
11

and

v.

12 RGAR HOLDINGS, LLC, a Florida limited
13 liability company, formerly known as TAKE 5
SOLUTIONS, LLC., a Florida limited liability
RICHARD
GLUCK,
14 company,
ALEXANDER RADETICH, JOHN DOE I,
15 and JOHN DOE II,

16
17

Fourth-Party Defendants.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION

1

Plaintiffs Juvenal Robles and Abel Figueroa (together, “Plaintiffs”), Defendant Lucky Brand

2 Dungarees, Inc. (“Lucky”), Defendants Kirshenbaum Bond Senecal& Partners LLC, f/k/a
3 Kirshenbaum Bond & Partners LLC, d/b/a Lime Public Relations + Promotion and Kirshenbaum
4 Bond & Partners West LLC (together, “Lime”), and Third-Party Defendant Merkle Inc. (“Merkle”),
5 (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their counsel, stipulate as follows:
6

1.

Plaintiff Robles filed his Class Action Complaint on October 26, 2010, alleging

7 Defendant Lucky violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227, by sending an
8 allegedly unsolicited text message to Plaintiff's cellular telephone in the summer of 2008. (Dkt. 1.)
9

2.

Lucky answered the Complaint, asserting, among other things, various defenses that

10 included issues involving consent, authorization, and other elements of Plaintiff’s statutory claim.
11 (Dkt. 15.)
12

3.

On January 21, 2011, Judge Fogel held an initial case scheduling conference and

13 ordered the Parties to participate in a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Lloyd and to
14 return and report on the result of that conference. (Dkt. 18.)
15

4.

Plaintiff Robles and Defendant Lucky participated in a settlement conference before

16 Judge Lloyd on April 29, 2011. Lime, Merkle and RGAR Holdings, LLC (“RGAR”), who were all
17 third-parties at the time, also participated in the settlement conference.At the settlement conference,
18 Plaintiff Robles, Defendant Lucky, and the third-partiescandidly discussed their various respective
19 positions about the litigation and settlement. During these discussions, it was determined that
20 limited focused discovery or information was required to continue productive discussions toward
21 resolution. Upon the recommendation of Judge Lloyd, Plaintiff Robles, Defendant Lucky, the third22 parties, and insurers agreed to return for a further settlement conference. (See Dkt. 32.)
23

5.

Prior to the further settlement conference, Plaintiff Robles filed an Amended

24 Complaint. (Dkt. 39.) The Amended Complaint alleges a single claim for violation of the TCPA,
25 under the same general allegations stated in the original Complaint, on behalf of both
26 PlaintiffRobles and Plaintiff Figueroa. The Amended Complaint also adds Lime as a named
27 defendant.
28
-1STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION

1

6.

Lime and Lucky answered the Amended Complaint. (Dkts. 45, 48.) Lime also filed

2 a Third-Party Complaint against Merkle. (Dkt. 44). Merkle answered the Third-Party Complaint
3 and filed a Fourth-Party Complaint againstRGAR. (Dkts. 64, 66.)
4

7.

The Parties participated in a furthersettlement conference before Judge Lloyd on

5 September 21, 2011. The Parties were able to advance their settlement discussion during the second
6 settlement conference, but did not reach a final agreement. The Parties agreed to continue those
7 discussions in the context of a full-day mediation and, in the interim, to limit activity in the case to
8 only discovery necessary to complete mediation.The Parties thereafter scheduled a full-day
9 mediation before the Honorable Nicholas H. Politan (Ret.)in West Palm Beach, Florida and set the
10 mediation for December 8, 2011.
11

8.

On January 26, 2012, the Parties attended a formal mediation with Judge Politan

12 where the terms of a global settlement were negotiated. After a full-day mediation, the Parties
13 made further progress with the assistance of Judge Politian and at the end of the mediation session
14 Judge Politan presented a mediator’s proposal, of which the Parties were to report their acceptance
15 or rejection by February 29, 2012. During the pendency of this mediator’s proposal response
16 period, Judge Politan unexpectedly passed away. However, not all of the Parties ultimately
17 accepted Judge Politan’s proposal.
18

9.

On March 23, 2012, counsel for the Parties attended the Joint Case Management

19 Conference scheduled by the Court. During the CMC, the Parties informed the Court that
20 settlement negotiations were ongoing and that the Parties were considering returning to mediation
21 with the Honorable Eugene Lynch (Ret.). Although the Parties agreed to continue settlement
22 discussions, the Court also entered a scheduling Order setting June 4, 2012 as the deadline to amend
23 all pleadingsas well as several class certification discovery deadlines beginning in July 2012. (See
24 Dkt. 83.)
25

10.

During subsequent discussions leading up tothe scheduling of the mediation with

26 Judge Lynch, the Parties were able to reach an agreement as to all material terms of a class action
27 settlement of this matter.
28
-2STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION

1

11.

The Parties anticipate that the settlement papers will be executed, and that

2 Plaintiffswill move for preliminary approval of the class action settlement, within forty-five (45)
3 days.
4

12.

The Parties therefore stipulate to staying all pending motion and discovery deadlines

5 in this case to allow them time to memorialize the settlement terms.
6
7

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

8
9

Dated: May 25, 2012
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

10
11

By

12
13
14

/s/ Craig Cardon
CRAIG CARDON
BRIAN R. BLACKMAN
Attorneys for
Defendant LUCKY BRAND DUNGAREES, INC.

Dated: May 25, 2012

15

EDELSON MCGUIRE LLC

16
17

By

18
19

/s/ Ryan D. Andrews
RYAN D. ANDREWS
SEAN REIS
Attorneys for
Plaintiffs JUVENAL ROBLESand ABEL FIGUEROA

20 Dated: May 25, 2012
21

WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER LLP

22
23
24
25
26

By

/s/ Sara J. Savage
DAVID SHEIFFER
SARA J. SAVAGE
Attorneys for
Defendants KIRSHENBAUM BOND SENECAL &
PARTNERS LLC and KIRSHENBAUM BOND &
PARTNERS WEST LLC

27
28
-3STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION

1
2
3

Dated: May 25, 2012
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

/s/ Peter Winik
PETER WINIK
MATTHEW RAWLINSON
SARAH GRAGERT
Attorneys for
Third-Party Defendant MERKLE, INC.

By

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
-4-

STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION

CERTIFICATION

1
2

I, Ryan D. Andrews, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to

3 file this Stipulation And [Proposed] Order Staying Litigation Pending Class Action Settlement. In
4 compliance with General Order 45.X.B., I hereby attest that the Counsel whose electronic
5 signatures appear on this document have concurred in this filing and that the same will be delivered
6 to those registered with the Court’s CM/ECF system.
7 Dated: May 25, 2012
8

EDELSON MCGUIRE LLC

9
10
11
12

By

/s/ Ryan D. Andrews
RYAN D. ANDREWS
Attorneys for
Plaintiffs JUVENAL ROBLESand ABEL FIGUEROA

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION

ORDER

1
2

Having considered the Parties’Stipulation and good cause appearing, this litigation,

3 including amended pleading deadlines, motion deadlines, and all discovery obligations, shall be
4 stayed for a period of forty-five (45) days from the date of this Order.
5
6

The parties are directed to file, no later than July 13, 2012, a Joint Status Report, said
deadline to stand vacated without further order of the Court in the event plaintiffs have filed,
on or before July 13, 2012, a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

30
9 Dated: May ___, 2012

10
______________________________
The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1-

STIP. & ORDER STAYING LITIGATION