Cordy v. USS-Posco Industries et al

Filing 55

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT re 54 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re Extension of Deadline to file Motion for Preliminary Approval filed by USS-Posco Industries. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on September 25, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2013)

1 TODD M. SCHNEIDER (SBN 158253)
CAROLYN H. COTTRELL (SBN 166977)
2 SCHNEIDER WALLACE
COTTRELL KONECKY LLP
3 180 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94104
4 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
5
SCOTT A. BROWN (SBN 177099)
6 BROWN | POORE LLP
1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 400
7 Walnut Creek, California 94597
Telephone: [phone]
8 Facsimile: [phone]
9 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Putative Class
10 SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
Francis J. Ortman III (SBN 213202)
11 [e-mail]
Cassandra H. Carroll (SBN 209123)
12 [e-mail]
Emily E. Barker (SBN 275166)
13 [e-mail]
560 Mission Street, 31st Floor
14 San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: [phone]
15 Facsimile: [phone]
16 Attorneys for Defendant
USS-POSCO INDUSTRIES
17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

20

21 CARL CORDY, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated,
22
Plaintiff,
23
vs.
24
25 USS-POSCO INDUSTRIES, UNITED
STATES STEEL CORPORATION, POSCO –
26 CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, PITCAL,
INC., and DOES 1 to 50
27
Defendants.
28

Case No.: 3:12-cv-00553-JST
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
REGARDING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE
TO FILE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION
SETTLEMENT
CLASS ACTION

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION
FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
Cordy, et al. v. USS-POSCO Industries, et al., Case No. 3:12-cv-00553-JST
16196940v.1

STIPULATION

1
2

Plaintiff Carl Cordy (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant USS-POSCO INDUSTRIES (“Defendant”

3 OR “UPI”) (collectively “the Parties”) hereby respectfully submit this stipulation and proposed
4 order requesting a brief extension of the deadline to file the Motion for Preliminary Approval of
5 Class Action Settlement and supporting documents.
6

WHEREAS, the Parties negotiated a settlement following mediation, and negotiated and

7 executed a settlement agreement on June 14, 2013;
8

WHEREAS, Plaintiff submitted a Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and

9 supporting documents on July 23, 2013 (Doc. No. 48);
10

WHEREAS, on July 31, 2013, this Court issued an order requesting that the Parties address

11 and/or cure several issues relating to the settlement as addressed in its Order Denying Preliminary
12 Approval of Class Action Settlement (Doc. No. 52);
13

WHEREAS, this Court stated in its Order that Plaintiff may file another Motion for

14 Preliminary Approval of Class Action settlement by September 30, 2013 (Doc. No. 52).
15

WHEREAS, the Parties have been diligently negotiating additional and new settlement

16 terms and details with respect to the settlement reached in this matter. The additional and new
17 settlement terms address and/or are in response to this Court’s Order requesting that these issues be
18 addressed and/or cured. The Parties have reached agreement regarding the new terms and believe
19 that they appropriately address the issues highlighted in the Court’s Order;
20

WHEREAS, one of the new terms negotiated and agreed to by the parties involves a revised

21 allocation of settlement proceeds and several distribution formulas, tailored specifically to each of
22 Plaintiff’s claims. The new proposed distribution formulas require the gathering of significant data
23 and information by Defendant UPI accounting and/or payroll department. Such information is
24 necessary to ensure that the new allocation and proposed distribution are fair and equitable;
25

WHEREAS, the parties just learned that the individual at UPI responsible for obtaining and

26 organizing the necessary data is unavailable and is unable to obtain and gather the necessary data
27 by September 30, 2013;
28

1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION
FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT
16196940v.1

1
2
3
4
5

WHEREAS the Parties request a brief extension of the deadline to file the preliminary
approval papers to allow them time to obtain the data, ensure its accuracy and present it to this
Court with the preliminary approval papers;
WHEREAS, the Parties stipulate and request that the deadline to file preliminary approval
paper be extended to FROM September 30, 2013 to October 8, 2013.

6
7
8

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
DATED: September 25, 2013

s/s Carolyn H. Cottrell________
Carolyn H. Cottrell
SCHNEIDER WALLACE
COTTRELL KONECKY LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiff CARL CORDY
and the Putative Class

DATED: September 25, 2013

s/s Scott A. Brown______________
Scott A. Brown
BROWN | POORE LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiff CARL CORDY
and the Putative Class

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ________________________
September 25, 2013

22
23

RT

25

n S. T
J u d ge J o

ER

H

26
27
28

_____________________________________
Hon. Jon S. Tigar
VED
APPRO
United States District Judge

NO

24

UNIT
ED

21

RT
U
O

S

20

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

i ga r

A

19

R NIA

18

FO

17

s/s Cassandra H. Carroll_________
Francis J. Ortman, III
Cassandra H. Carroll
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
Attorneys for Defendant USS-POSCO INDUSTRIES

LI

16 DATED: September 25, 2013

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION
FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT
16196940v.1