Akaosugi et al v. Benihana, Inc.

Filing 49

ORDER ON MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION by Hon. William Alsup granting in part and denying in part 45 Motion for Extension of Time to File.(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

TETSUO AKAOSUGI, HIEU NGUYEN,
on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

No. C 11-01272 WHA

Plaintiffs,

ORDER ON MOTION TO
ENLARGE TIME FOR
CLASS CERTIFICATION

v.
BENIHANA INC., d/b/a BENIHANA
NATIONAL CORPORATION, and
DOES 1 through 50,
Defendants.
/

Plaintiffs’ filed a motion to enlarge time for class certification. Defendants oppose. The

19

current deadline to file a motion for class certification is December 1, 2011 (Dkt. No. 25).

20

Plaintiffs request the deadline be continued to February 29, 2012.

21

Plaintiffs assert that absent enlargement of time to file the motion for class certification,

22

plaintiffs and the putative class members risk substantial harm and irreversible prejudice. In

23

support of their argument, plaintiffs state defendants have caused unjustified delays in litigating

24

this matter by denying plaintiffs access to a putative class list (Br. 4). On October 13, defendants

25

were ordered to produce a contact list for salaried managers pursuant to the terms of the order

26

(Dkt. No. 46). Plaintiffs also contend that until there is an order on the motion to dismiss, which

27

is scheduled to be heard on November 17, 2011, plaintiffs will lack certainty as to the identities of

28

the parties, the scope of the putative class, and range of potential common issues (Br. 4).

1

Defendants respond that plaintiffs delayed in filing the amended complaint, even though,

2

in March 2011, counsel for defendants made plaintiffs aware they would need to amend their

3

complaint to add the subsidiary corporations, which employ some of the putative class members

4

(Hart Decl. ¶ 2). Defendants further argue that plaintiffs cannot now use their own delay as an

5

excuse to alter the briefing schedule and that plaintiffs have been in possession of all discovery

6

necessary to move for class certification since July 2011 (Opp. 2).

7

There is good cause to continue the deadline to file a motion for class certification for a

8

short period of time. The deadline to file a motion for class certification will be extended to

9

JANUARY 3, 2012. This extension will not affect any other deadlines set forth in the case
management order.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Dated: October 24, 2011.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2