Sharma et al v. BMW of North America LLC
Filing
133
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 131 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER for Leave to Exceed Page Limit for Attachments Related to Discovery Letter Briefs filed by Monita Sharma, Eric Anderson. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 3/7/16. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/7/2016)
1
7
William A. Kershaw (State Bar No. 057486)
Email: wkershaw@kcrlegal.com
Stuart C. Talley (State Bar No. 180374)
Email: stalley@kcrlegal.com
Ian J. Barlow (State Bar No. 262213)
Email: ibarlow@kcrlegal.com
KERSHAW, CUTTER & RATINOFF LLP
401 Watt Avenue
Sacramento, California 95864
Telephone:
(916) 448-9800
Facsimile:
(916) 669-4499
8
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
2
3
4
5
6
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13
14
15
MONITA SHARMA and ERIC
ANDERSON, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated,
16
17
18
Plaintiffs,
v.
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company,
Case No. 3:13-cv-02274-MMC (KAW)
STIPULATED ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED
PAGE LIMIT FOR ATTACHMENTS
RELATED TO DISCOVERY LETTER
BRIEFS; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore
19
Defendant.
20
21
Pursuant to Northern District of California Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 7-12, Plaintiffs
22
Monita Sharma and Eric Anderson (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant BMW of North America, LLC
23
(“BMW NA” or “Defendant”), by and through their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate as
24
follows:
25
STIPULATION
26
27
111 and 113), which were terminated after the parties “failed to propose a compromise in their
28
WHEREAS, the parties previously filed three joint discovery letter briefs (Dkt. Nos. 110,
filings, . . . .” (Order Terminating Discovery Letter Briefs (Dkt. No. 114));
STIP. ADMIN. MOT. FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT FOR ATTACHMENTS; [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
WHEREAS, the parties have extensively met and conferred and exchanged final proposed
2
compromises pursuant to this Court’s Order Terminating Discovery Letter Briefs, but were
3
unable to reach agreements, including on discovery disputes regarding: (1) BMW NA’s further
4
responses and production of documents related to the design, manufacturing and testing for
5
putative class vehicles; and (2) the limited scope of BMW NA’s discovery responses;
6
7
WHEREAS, the parties have included proposed compromises in the respective sections of
their discovery letter briefs pursuant to this Court’s Order Terminating Discovery Letter Briefs;
8
WHEREAS, as with the parties’ initial filings, two of the impending joint discovery letter
9
briefs involve disputes that relate to several interrogatories and requests for production of
10
documents and, for purposes of economy and judicial efficiency, the parties have structured their
11
letter briefs so that they separately address a single overarching issue as opposed to filing multiple
12
joint discovery letter briefs based on the same issue. For example, the parties’ discovery dispute
13
regarding “design and manufacturing” documents and responses encompasses twenty-two
14
separate document requests and eleven interrogatory responses, and the parties’ “discovery
15
scope” dispute encompasses twenty separate document requests and eleven interrogatory
16
responses;1
17
WHEREAS, the Standing Order for Magistrate Judge Westmore was revised on
18
December 22, 2015, after the parties filed their initial joint discovery letter briefs, and now
19
requires that “[a]ny attachments shall not exceed 12 pages.” (Standing Order for Magistrate
20
Judge Westmore ¶ 13); and
21
WHEREAS, the parties were able to present these overarching disputes in joint letters that
22
do not exceed five pages (as required by the Court’s Standing Order), because the parties are
23
required to attach the propounded discovery and applicable responses as exhibits to the joint
24
discovery letters (id.) and two of their joint letters relate to a single issue that involves several
25
discovery requests, they are unable to fully comply with the page limitation for attachments.
26
27
28
1
The parties’ joint discovery letter brief regarding BMW NA’s document retention policies relates to a
single document request and was filed on February 29, 2016. (Dkt. No. 130.)
2
STIP. ADMIN. MOT. FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT FOR ATTACHMENTS; [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
(See, e.g., Dkt. Nos. 111-1, 111-2, 111-4);
2
NOW, THEREFORE, undersigned counsel for the parties, having met and conferred and
3
good cause appearing, hereby stipulate and agree to extend the page limit for attachments to two
4
of their joint discovery letter briefs as follows:
5
6
7
8
1. Joint Discovery Letter Re: Manufacturing Documents and Responses: Exhibit C (33
pages); Exhibit D (16 pages); and Exhibit F (26 pages); and
2. Joint Discovery Letter Re: Limited Scope of Discovery Responses: Exhibit A (29
pages); Exhibit B (19 pages); and Exhibit D (16 pages).
9
10
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED.
11
12
Dated: March 1, 2016.
KERSHAW, CUTTER, & RATINOFF, LLP
13
By:
14
15
16
17
18
/s/ William A. Kershaw
WILLIAM A. KERSHAW
Stuart C. Talley
Ian J. Barlow
401 Watt Avenue
Sacramento, California 95864
Telephone: (916) 448-9800
Facsimile: (916) 669-4499
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
19
20
21
Dated: March 1, 2016.
SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS LLP
25
/s/ Eric J. Knapp
ERIC J. KNAPP
Troy M. Yoshino
Aengus H. Carr
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: (415) 989-5900
Facsimile: (415) 989-0932
26
Attorneys for Defendant
22
23
24
27
28
By:
Civil L.R. 5-1(i) Certification
The filing attorney hereby certifies that concurrence in the filing of the document has been
obtained from each of the other signatories, in full accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i).
3
STIP. ADMIN. MOT. FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT FOR ATTACHMENTS; [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER
3
4
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
3/7/16
DATED: ______________________
_______________________________
Honorable Kandis A. Westmore
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIP. ADMIN. MOT. FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT FOR ATTACHMENTS; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?