Gitson et al v. Trader Joe's Company

Filing 103

ORDER GRANTING re 102 Joint Status Report Re: Scheduling of Settlement Conference filed by Trader Joe's Company. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 9/2/14. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/3/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

CARLA CHRISTOFFERSON (S.B. #161111)
[e-mail]
ADAM G. LEVINE (S.B. #200522)
[e-mail]
KATE IDES (S.B. #274820)
[e-mail]
DANIEL J. FARIA (S.B. #285158)
[e-mail]
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
400 South Hope Street
Los Angeles, California 90071-2899
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
RANDALL W. EDWARDS (S.B. #179053)
[e-mail]
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3823
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
Trader Joe’s Company

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
17

AMY GITSON et al.,

18
19
20
21
22

Case No. 13-CV-1333 VC
Plaintiffs,

v.

JOINT STATUS UPDATE RE:
SCHEDULING OF MANDATORY
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER

TRADER JOE’S COMPANY,
Judge:

Hon. Joseph C. Spero

TAC Filed:
Trial Date:

April 3, 2014
March 23, 2015

Defendant.

23
24
25
26
27
28

JOINT STATUS UPDATE RE:
SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE;
13-CV-1333 VC

1

Plaintiffs Amy Gitson and Deborah Ross and Defendant Trader Joe’s Company

2

(collectively, the “Parties”), respectfully submit this joint status update regarding the scheduling

3

of the mandatory settlement conference in this matter.

4

On April 28, 2014, the Parties submitted a joint stipulation requesting that this Court

5

vacate the settlement conference scheduled for May 5, 2014. At that time, Trader Joe’s had two

6

motions pending before Judge Chhabria—a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Third Amended

7

Complaint (Dkt. No. 82) and a motion to certify for interlocutory appeal (Dkt. No. 74). A central

8

issue raised by both motions was whether Plaintiffs have standing to assert claims as to

9

approximately 177 products they did not purchase. At the time the Parties submitted the joint

10

stipulation, they did not believe they were in the position to engage in meaningful settlement

11

discussions until this issue was resolved. On April 28, 2014, this Court vacated the May 5, 2014

12

settlement conference and continued it until a date approximately 60 days after the entry of an

13

order on Trader Joe’s motion to dismiss, or 60 days after entry of an order on Trader Joe’s motion

14

to certify for interlocutory appeal, whichever came later.

15

On August 8, 2014, Judge Chhabria entered a single order on both motions. (Dkt. No.

16

101.) The sum of this order is that Judge Chhabria denied the motion for interlocutory appeal as

17

to the issue of whether Plaintiffs have standing to assert claims as to approximately 177 products

18

they did not purchase. (Id. at 2-3.) As to Trader Joe’s motion to dismiss, he stayed the entire case

19

on primary jurisdiction grounds until at least November 4, 2014 because the FDA “appears to be

20

considering the lawfulness of the use of the term ‘evaporated cane juice’ on food labels” (id. at 3-

21

4), and denied the remainder of Trader Joe’s motion to dismiss without prejudice to re-filing once

22

the stay is lifted (id. at 4).

23

The Parties are in nearly the same situation as when they last requested a continuance of

24

the settlement conference scheduled in this matter. Notably, the operative pleadings in this matter

25

remain unsettled as Trader Joe’s intends to refile its motion to dismiss the Third Amended

26

Complaint once the stay is lifted and a central issue raised by that motion will be whether the

27

Plaintiffs have standing to assert claims as to approximately 177 products they did not purchase,

28
-1-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE RE:
SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE;
13-CV-1333 VC

1

and Defendant believes the FDA may issue a guidance relevant to Plaintiffs’ claims regarding the

2

use of “evaporated cane juice,” as recognized by Judge Chhabria in his August 8, 2014 order.

3

(See Dkt. No. 101 at 3.) Given such, the Parties do not believe they are in the position to schedule

4

a settlement conference at this time, and so the Parties propose that within 10 days of the

5

November 4, 2014 Case Management Conference, where at Judge Chhabria will consider the

6

propriety of maintaining the stay, they will jointly submit a status update wherein they will report

7

on (1) the status of the stay; (2) if the stay is lifted, whether Trader Joe’s intends to re-file its

8

motion to dismiss the third amended complaint and, if so, by which date the Parties anticipate the

9

motion will be resolved; and (3) if the stay is lifted and Trader Joe’s refiles its motion to dismiss

10

the Third Amended Complaint, the date by which the Parties will jointly contact Judge Spero’s

11

chambers to select a settlement conference date.

12
13

Dated: August 29, 2014
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

14

By:

s/ Kate Ides
Kate Ides
Attorneys for Defendant
Trader Joe’s Company

15
16
17
18
19
20

Dated: August 29, 2014
CLIFFORD LAW OFFICES, P.C.
By:

s/ Colin H. Dunn
Colin H. Dunn
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Amy Gitson and Deborah Ross

21
22

[PROPOSED] ORDER

23

Having reviewed the Parties’ joint status update regarding the scheduling of the

24

mandatory settlement conference in this matter, it is hereby ordered that within 10 days of the

25

November 4, 2014 Case Management Conference, where at Judge Chhabria will consider the

26

propriety of maintaining the stay, the Parties will jointly submit a status update to this Court

27

wherein they will report on (1) the status of the stay; (2) if the stay is lifted, whether Trader Joe’s

28
-2-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE RE:
SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE;
13-CV-1333 VC

1

intends to re-file its motion to dismiss the third amended complaint and, if so, by which date the

2

Parties anticipate the motion will be resolved; and (3) if the stay is lifted and Trader Joe’s refiles

3

its motion to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint, the date by which the Parties will jointly

4

contact Judge Spero’s chambers to select a settlement conference date.

09/02/14
Dated: ____________________

RT

seph C.

Judge Jo

Spero

THE HONORABLE JOSEPH C. SPERO
ER
C
A

H

9

NO

8

R NIA

7

LI

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FO

UNIT
ED

6

ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T

RT
U
O

S

5

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE RE:
SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE;
13-CV-1333 VC

1
2
3

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
The filing attorney attests that he has obtained concurrence regarding the filing of this
document from each of the other signatories to this document.

4
5

Dated: August 29, 2014

6

CARLA CHRISTOFFERSON
RANDALL W. EDWARDS
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

7

By:

8
9

s/ Kate Ides
Kate Ides
Attorneys for Defendant
Trader Joe’s Company

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-

JOINT STATUS UPDATE RE:
SCHEDULING OF SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE;
13-CV-1333 VC