Khan et al v. K2 Pure Solutions, LP

Filing 91

STIPULATION AND ORDER LIMITING DISCOVERY PENDING RULING ON DEFENDANTS' PENDING MOTIONS re 88 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER. Case Management Conference set for 11/27/2013 09:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 11/14/2013. (CMC set for 12/10/13 is vacated) (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/14/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
D OCU ME NT P RE PA RED
ON R E CYCL ED P A PE R

SMITH LILLIS PITHA LLP
Martin L. Pitha (State Bar No. 192447)
18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1080
Irvine, California 92612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
SMITH LILLIS PITHA LLP
James Smith (State Bar No. 190050)
115 Sansome Street, Suite 1005
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P.
Gerard G. Pecht [pro hac vice application to be filed]
Brian C. Boyle, admitted pro hac vice
Lauren W. Varnado admitted pro hac vice
Fulbright Tower
1301 McKinney, Suite 5100
Houston, Texas 77010
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant K2 PURE
SOLUTIONS, LP and Defendants K2 PURE SOLUTIONS
NOCAL, L.P. and K2 PURE SOLUTIONS PITTSBURG, LP.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
IMTIAZ KHAN, an individual, TIM
)
Case No. 3:12-CV-12-05526-WHO
MORRIS, an individual, RICK SEISINGER,
)
an individual, and NEELESH SHAH, an
)
individual,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
STIPULATION AND ORDER
)
LIMITING DISCOVERY PENDING
vs.
)
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’
)
PENDING MOTIONS
K2 PURE SOLUTIONS, LP, a Delaware
)
limited partnership, K2 PURE SOLUTIONS
)
NOCAL, L.P., a Delaware limited
)
partnership, K2 PURE SOLUTIONS
)
PITTSBURG, L.P., a Delaware limited
)
partnership, and DOES 1 through 10
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Plaintiffs Imtiaz Khan, Tim Morris, Rick Seisinger, and Neelesh Shah (collectively,
“Plaintiffs”), and Defendants K2 Pure Solutions, L.P., K2 Pure Solutions Nocal, L.P., and K2
Pure Solutions Pittsburg, L.P. (collectively, “K2” or “Defendants”) hereby stipulate and agree:
1.

As of the date of the filing of this Stipulation and Proposed Order through the date

of the hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Causes of Action 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of Plaintiffs’
Third Amended Complaint and Motion to Strike Pursuant to FRCP 12(f) (Ct. Dkt. No. 73)
(“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss”) and Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order
Granting Summary Judgment on Ninth Cause of Action (Ct. Dkt. No. 78) set on November 27,
2013, the parties agree to limit discovery to the following topics: (1) jurisdictional issues; (2)
Plaintiffs’ claim for waiting time penalties; and (3) K2’s counterclaim for overpaid vacation
against Timothy Morris and Imtiaz Khan. The parties agree that all responses to outstanding
written discovery propounded by Plaintiffs which relate to claims not disposed of by Defendants’
Motion to Dismiss will be due by no later than Friday, December 13, 2013 by electronic service.
The parties further agree that all responses to outstanding written discovery propounded by
Defendants which relate to claims not disposed of by Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be due
by no later than Friday, December 27, 2013 by electronic service.
2.

The parties agree to an extension of the existing December 6, 2013 discovery cut-

off deadline and respectfully request that the Court enter the parties’ proposed order continuing
the existing discovery cut-off deadline to Friday, February 28, 2014. In the event the existing
discovery cut-off date is not continued by this Court, the parties reserve the right to amend the
due dates of the responses referenced in Paragraph (1) above.
3.

The parties further agree that it will be unnecessary to identify or assert any

attorney-client privilege or work product protection with regard to (1) privileged documents
prepared after September 15, 2012 by or at the direction of legal counsel related to this litigation
or related litigation; (2) any correspondence sent after September 15, 2012 between an attorney
and his/her client or among attorneys jointly representing a client in this litigation or related

1
2
3 litigation. For purposes of this stipulation, related litigation includes the cases styled K2 Pure
4 Solutions, LP v. Imtiaz Khan and Neelesh Shah, Civ. No. 5:12-CV-02558, in the United States
5 District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, and K2 Pure Solutions, LP v. Molycorp Inc.,
6 Molycorp Minerals, LLC, Timothy M. Morris, and Richard J. Seisinger, Case No. A-12-6700677 B, in the District Court of Clark County, Nevada. Except to the foregoing documents and
8 communications, the parties agree that this agreement does not relieve either party of the
9 requirement to timely assert the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine or any other
10 applicable objections in responses to written discovery or at deposition in order to preserve such
11 objections.
12

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

13
14
Dated: November 8, 2013
15

VALDEZ TODD & DOYLE LLP
Troy A. Valdez

16
/s/ Sheila A. Khan-Variba
By ___________________________________
Sheila A. Khan-Variba
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Imtiaz Khan, Tim Morris, Rick Seisinger, and
Neelesh Shah

17
18
19
20
21Dated: November 8, 2013

SMITH LILLIS PITHA LLP
Martin L. Pitha

22
23
24
25
Dated: November 8, 2013
26
27
28
D OCU ME NT P RE PA RED
ON R E CYCL ED P A PE R

53056754.1

/s/ Martin L. Pitha
By ___________________________________
Martin L. Pitha
Attorneys for Defendants
FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P.
Gerard G. Pecht [pro hac vice application to be filed]
Brian C. Boyle, admitted pro hac vice
Lauren W. Varnado [pro hac vice application to be
filed]
- iii -

1
2
3
/s/ Brian C. Boyle
By ___________________________________
BRIAN C. BOYLE
Attorneys for Defendants

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
D OCU ME NT P RE PA RED
ON R E CYCL ED P A PE R

53056754.1

- iv -

1
2
ORDER

3
4
5

Upon consideration of the foregoing Stipulation, PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT

6 IS SO ORDERED, as modified, that:
7

(1)

As of the date of the filing of this Stipulation through the November 27, 2013,

8 hearing date, the parties’ discovery shall be limited to issues related to: (1) jurisdictional issues;
9 (2) Plaintiffs’ claim for waiting time penalties; and (3) Defendants’ counterclaim for overpaid
10

vacation;

11
(2)

All responses to outstanding written discovery propounded by Plaintiffs which

12
13

relate to claims not disposed of by Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will be due by no later than

14 Friday, December 13, 2013, by electronic service. All responses to outstanding written discovery
15 propounded by Defendants which relate to claims not disposed of by Defendants’ Motion to
16 Dismiss will be due by no later than Friday, December 27, 2013, by electronic service.
17
18

(3)

The Court will hold a further Case Management Conference at the conclusion

of the hearing on November 27, 2013, to discuss the case schedule. The existing December 6,

19
20
21

2013, discovery cut-off deadline will be extended at that time once it is clear to the Court how
much discovery remains and clear to the parties what impact any necessary extension would have

22 on the trial date.
23
24
25

Dated: November 14, 2013

26

________________________
William H. Orrick
United States District Court Judge

27
28
D OCU ME NT P RE PA RED
ON R E CYCL ED P A PE R

53056754.1

-v-