Astiana v. Dreyer's Grand Ice Cream, Inc.

Filing 33

STIPULATION AND ORDER RESETTING CMC re (22 in 3:11-cv-03164-EMC, 22 in 3:11-cv-03164-EMC) Stipulation and Order,, Set Deadlines/Hearings, Case Management Statement due by 3/16/2012. Case Management Conference set for 3/23/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/24/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/24/2012)

1 MAYER BROWN LLP
Carmine R. Zarlenga (D.C. Bar No. 286244)
2 [e-mail]
1999 K Street, N.W.
3 Washington, D.C. 20006-1101
Telephone: [phone]
4 Facsimile: [phone]
5 MAYER BROWN LLP
Dale J. Giali (Cal. Bar No. 150382)
6 [e-mail]
350 South Grand Avenue
7 25th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1503
8 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
9
Attorneys for Defendant
10 DREYER’S GRAND ICE CREAM, INC.
11
12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

15 SKYE ASTIANA, et al.,
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
DREYER’S GRAND ICE CREAM, INC., )
)
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
PAMELA RUTLEDGE-MUHS, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
DREYER’S GRAND ICE CREAM, INC., )
)
Defendant.
)
)

Case No. C11-02910 EMC
consolidated with
Case No. C11-3164 EMC
STIPULATION AND [proposed]
ORDER (1) FURTHER CONTINUING
FEBRUARY 24, 2012 INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, (2)
FURTHER CONTINUING THE
DATE TO RESPOND TO THE
COMPLAINT, AND (3) FURTHER
CONFIRMING THAT THE PARTIES
WILL TEMPORARILY FOREGO
LITIGATION ACTIVITIES

28
STIPULATION AND ORDER FURTHER CONTINUING
Case No. C11-02910
701023689.1

Plaintiffs Skye Astiana, Pamela Rutledge-Muhs and Jay Woolwine and defendant

1

2 Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream, Inc., now known as Nestlé Dreyer’s Ice Cream Co.
3 (“Dreyer’s”), by and through their respective counsel of record and pursuant to Local
4 Rules 6-2 and 7-12, enter into the following stipulation for an order (1) further
5 continuing the initial case management conference from February 24, 2012 to March
6 23, 2012, (2) further continuing the last day to consider and re-set, as appropriate,
7 Dreyer’s response date to the March 23, 2012 case management conference, and (3)
8 further confirming that the parties will forego litigation activities for a short period, all
9 to facilitate further mediation of this consolidated action without having simultaneously
10 to expend the Court’s and parties’ time and resources on litigation:
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2011, plaintiff Astiana filed her initial complaint (Dkt.

11
12 #1);
13

WHEREAS, on June 27, 2011, plaintiffs Rutledge-Muhs and Woolwine filed

14 their initial complaint (Dkt. # 1 in Case No. C11-3164 EMC);
15

WHEREAS, on July 6, 2011, plaintiff Astiana and Dreyer’s agreed to extend the

16 time for Dreyer’s to respond to the Astiana complaint for 30 days (Dkt. #11);
17

WHEREAS, on August 18, 2011, the two complaints were deemed “related” and

18 Rutledge-Muhs was re-assigned to this department (Dkt. #17);
19

WHEREAS, on August 22, 2011, the Court issued an Order setting a single case

20 management conference for both cases for October 28, 2011 (Dkt. #18);
21

WHEREAS, on August 31, 2011, the court continued the October 28, 2011 initial

22 case management conference to December 16, 2011 and extended Dreyer’s time to
23 respond to the complaints in the related actions until 30 days following the completion
24 of a planned November 30, 2011 mediation (Dkt. #23);
25

WHEREAS, on September 30, 2011, the Court consolidated the two cases for all

26 purposes, designating the Astiana complaint as the single active complaint and relieving
27 Dreyer’s from any obligation to respond to the Rutledge-Muhs complaint (Dkt. #27);
28
-1STIPULATION AND ORDER FURTHER CONTINUING CMC
Case No. C11-02910
701023689.1

1

WHEREAS, on November 30, 2011, the parties engaged in a full day mediation

2 session in New York, New York, before David Geronemus of JAMS, and while the
3 parties were unable to settle the matter during the first day of mediation, sufficient
4 progress was made that the parties believed a second day of mediation was appropriate
5 and warranted;
6

WHEREAS, on December 8, 2011, the parties informed the Court of (i) their

7 intention to schedule an additional day of mediation in an effort to exhaust all
8 possibilities of settlement, and (ii) their desire that they should conduct the second day
9 of mediation without having simultaneously to litigate the action so as to preserve the
10 scarce resources of the Court and the time and resources of the parties (Dkt. #29);
11

WHEREAS, on December 13, 2011, and pursuant to the parties’ stipulation (Dkt.

12 #29), the Court issued an Order (Dkt. #30) providing that (i) the parties will schedule a
13 second day of mediation to occur following the exchanging or obtaining of agreed-upon
14 information, and will report to the Court once the second day of mediation is scheduled,
15 (ii), the December 16, 2011 initial case management conference is continued to Friday,
16 February 24, 2012, (iii) Dreyer’s last day to respond to the initial complaint in this
17 consolidated action is vacated, and the response date will be addressed and rescheduled,
18 as appropriate, at the continued case management conference, and (iv) the parties were
19 to cease all litigation activities until at least after the February 24, 2012 continued initial
20 case management conference;
21

WHEREAS, the parties have now scheduled a second day of mediation, but to

22 accommodate the schedules of the parties, their attorneys and the mediator, the second
23 day of mediation has been scheduled for the earliest reasonably feasible date of March
24 8, 2012; and
25

WHEREAS, the parties believe it appropriate in light of the March 8, 2012

26 scheduled second day of mediation to (i) further continue the initial case management
27 conference from February 24, 2012 to March 23, 2012, (ii) further continue the last day
28
-2STIPULATION AND ORDER FURTHER CONTINUING CMC
Case No. C11-02910
701023689.1

1 to re-set, as appropriate, Dreyer’s response date, and (iii) further confirm the parties’
2 litigation standstill;
3

NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS

4 HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties that:
5

1.

The February 24, 2012 initial case management conference is continued to

6 Friday, March 23, 2012 at 9 a.m. in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue,
7 San Francisco, California;
8

2.

Dreyer’s last day to respond to the initial complaint, which has been

9 vacated by the Court (Dkt. #30), will be addressed and rescheduled, as appropriate, at
10 the March 23, 2012 continued case management conference;
11

3.

The parties agree to cease all litigation activities, including but not limited

12 to serving discovery or addressing any of the obligations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 or
13 26(f), until at least after the March 23, 2012 continued initial case management
14 conference; and
15

4.

Nothing stated herein shall prevent the parties, or one of them, from

16 seeking an order extending the litigation standstill as appropriate or from seeking to
17 modify further the obligations and deadlines set out in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 or 26(f).
18 Dated: January 19, 2012

By: /s/ Janet Lindner Spielberg

19

Janet Lindner Spielberg, Co-Lead Attorney for Plaintiffs

20
21

LAW OFFICES OF JANET LINDNER SPIELBERG

Dated: January 19, 2012

MAYER BROWN LLP

22

By:

23

Dale J. Giali, Attorneys for Defendant

S

ERED

NO

RT

H

ER

FO

n

e
-3d M. Ch
e Edwar
Jud CMC
STIPULATION AND ORDER FURTHER CONTINUING g
Case No. C11-02910
701023689.1

R NIA

I
Hon. Edward M. Chen, U.S. District Judge

LI

28

ORD
T IS SO

C

A

24
26 Dated: January ___, 2012
27

TA

RT
U
O

25

SD
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. ISTRICT
TE

UNIT
ED

24

/s/ Dale J. Giali

C

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

I hereby certify that on January 19, 2012, I caused the foregoing STIPULATION
AND [proposed] ORDER (1) FURTHER CONTINUING FEBRUARY 24, 2012
INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, (2) FURTHER
CONTINUING THE DATE TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT, AND (3)
FURTHER CONFIRMING THAT THE PARTIES WILL TEMPORARILY
FOREGO LITIGATION ACTIVITIES to be electronically filed with the Clerk of the

8

Court. I understand that the Court will provide electronic notification of and access to

9

such filing to the counsel of record in this matter who are registered on the CM/ECF.

10
11

Dated: January 19, 2012

12

MAYER BROWN LLP
Dale J. Giali

13
14

By:

15

Dale J. Giali
Attorneys for Defendant
DREYER’S GRAND ICE CREAM, INC.

16
17

/s/ Dale J. Giali

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4STIPULATION AND ORDER FURTHER CONTINUING CMC
Case No. C11-02910
701023689.1