Trabakoolas et al v. Watts Water Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 258

STIPULATION AND ORDER STAYING LITIGATION AND PENDING DEADLINES FOR 45 DAYS re 256 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER. Within 30 days the parties will submit a joint report to the Court advising of the status of the settlement discussions and, if necessary, propose a schedule for further proceedings. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 08/22/2013. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/22/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Simon Bahne Paris
Patrick Howard
Charles J. Kocher
SALTZ, MONGELUZZI, BARRETT
& BENDESKY, P.C.
One Liberty Place, 52nd Floor
1650 Market Place
Philadelphia, PA19103
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Interim Lead Class Counsel

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12
13
14
15
16

JASON TRABAKOOLAS, SHEILA
STETSON, JACK WHEELER, CHRISTIE
MOONEY AND KEVEN TURNER
individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,

17

Plaintiffs,
18
19
20
21

v.
WATTS WATER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
WATTS REGULATOR CO., AND
WOLVERINE BRASS, INC.
Defendants.

No. 3:12-cv-01172-WHO (EDL)
CLASS ACTION
STIPULATION AND ORDER
STAYING LITIGATION AND
PENDING DEADLINES FOR 45
DAYS.
Honorable William H. Orrick III

22
23

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiffs Jason Trabakoolas, Sheila

24

Stetson, Jack Wheeler, Christie Mooney, and Keven Turner and Defendants Watts

25

Water Technologies, Inc., Watts Regulator Co., and Wolverine Brass, Inc., hereby

26

submit this Stipulated Request for Order Staying the Litigation and all Pending

27

Deadlines for 45 Days to focus on settlement discussions.

28
Page 1

1

WHEREAS, the parties engaged in two full day private mediation session

2

before former United States District Judge, Hon. Layn Phillips (Ret.) on February

3

20, 2013 and August 20, 2013, in an effort to resolve this case.

4

WHEREAS, following the August 20, 2013, mediation session, the parties

5

made significant progress toward settlement. Judge Phillips directed the parties to

6

complete a term sheet and to respond to a mediator’s proposal that could lead to a

7

settlement.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

WHEREAS, the Court entered an order on July 30, 2013 (ECF No. 211)
setting certain deadlines for this case:
1. Plaintiffs’ Rebuttal Expert Reports, September 30,
2013;
2. Expert Discovery Cutoff, October 21, 2013
3. Daubert Hearing, December 6, 2013;
4. Class Certification Hearing, February 5, 2014;
5. Pre-trial Conference, November 17, 2014; and
6. Trial by Jury, December 1, 2014

15

WHEREAS, the parties are in an intensive phase of the litigation, with

16

multiple deadlines in the next 60 days which will demand significant resources

17

from the parties and the Court. Plaintiffs’ experts are presently preparing their

18

rebuttal reports. In addition, Defendants’ 8 testifying experts are scheduled to be

19

deposed at various locations around the country between August 28 and

20

September 28. Plaintiffs also intend to depose other witnesses who Defendants’

21

experts have identified and/or consulted and have propounded further

22

interrogatories and document requests.

23

depositions of two named plaintiffs as well as all of Plaintiffs’ rebuttal experts.

Defendants will be taking the further

24

The parties together have filed or are meeting and conferring on at least five

25

discovery motions. Plaintiffs have one such motion currently pending before

26

Judge Laporte. (ECF No. 224). In addition, Plaintiffs would begin the meet and

27
28
Page 2

1

confer process with Defendants’ regarding Judge Laporte’s August 1, 2013 order

2

granting in-part Plaintiffs’ motion to compel documents withheld on the grounds

3

of privilege, and ordering the parties to meet and confer to resolve outstanding

4

issues related to the documents which were the subject of the motion. (ECF No.

5

210).

6

WHEREAS, due to the expense and time associated with all of these

7

litigation activities, the parties, with the support of Judge Phillips, ask the Court to

8

stay all of the litigation activity for 45 days so they can continue to focus their

9

efforts on reaching a resolution. Judge Phillips would be pleased to discuss his

10

recommendation with the Court and can be reached at [phone] or

11

[e-mail].

12
13

WHEREAS, the parties do not believe that a 45 day stay will impact the
scheduled pre-trial conference or the trial date set by the Court.

14

WHEREAS, within 30 days, the parties will submit a joint report to the

15

Court advising of the status of the settlement discussions and, if necessary,

16

propose a schedule for further proceedings.

17

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 3

1

Dated: August 22, 2013

2

SIMON B. PARIS
PATRICK HOWARD
SALTZ, MONGELUZZI, BARRETT
& BENDESKY, P.C.

3

By: /s/ Patrick Howard
PATRICK HOWARD
Admitted Pro Hac Vice

4
5

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

6

DAVID S MACCUISH
TODD B. BENOFF
ALSTON & BIRD LLP

7
8

By: /s/ David S. MacCuish
David S. MacCuish (SBN 54024)

9
10

Attorneys for Defendants
WATTS REGULATOR CO.,
WATTS WATER
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
and WOLVERINE BRASS, INC.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: August 22, 2013
_______________________________
Hon. William Orrick III
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 4