Yordy v. Plimus, Inc et al

Filing 135

ORDER re 130 Opposition/Response to Motion, filed by Plimus, Inc, vacating Plimus's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 1/15/14. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/15/2014)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

KIMBERLY YORDY,

6

Plaintiff,

7
8
9

v.
PLIMUS, INC,

Case No. 12-cv-00229-TEH
ORDER VACATING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

Defendant.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

On January 9, 2014, Defendant Plimus, Inc. (“Plimus”) filed a notice of motion and

12

motion for summary judgment along with its opposition to Plaintiff Kimberly Yordy’s

13

(“Yordy’s”) renewed motion for class certification. Plimus requested a hearing date 18

14

days later, on January 27, 2014. This is untimely under Civil Local Rule 7-2 (a), which

15

requires all motions to be noticed not less than 35 days after service of the motion.

16

Furthermore, the Court considers Plimus’s motion untimely in light of the schedule

17

adopted in this case. On November 14, 2013, the parties filed a joint stipulated request for

18

a revised case schedule. Docket No. 117. Plimus proposed that the parties brief class

19

certification and summary judgment simultaneously, whereas Yordy argued that summary

20

judgment should be briefed after the Court ruled on her renewed motion for class

21

certification. That same day, the Court entered an order rejecting Plimus’s position and

22

adopting Yordy’s proposed deadline for dispositive motions: “sixty (60) days following the

23

Court’s ruling on Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Class Certification.” Docket No. 118

24

(emphasis added). Although the Court’s order may not have been explicit, the Court now

25

clarifies its intention – to the extent Plimus had any uncertainty – to decide class

26

certification prior to summary judgment.

27
28

Accordingly the Court now VACATES Plimus’s motion for summary judgment.
Only those portions of Plimus’s brief relating to class certification will be considered.

1

Plimus may renew its motion for summary judgment, if appropriate, after the Court rules

2

on Yordy’s renewed motion for class certification, and no later than sixty (60) days

3

following such a ruling.

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7
8

Dated: 1/15/14

_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

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

2