Cotter v. Lyft, Inc.
Filing
136
Order granting 135 Stipulation Re Class Certification Briefing Schedule.(knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/16/2015)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
RACHAEL E. MENY - # 178514
rmeny@kvn.com
R. JAMES SLAUGHTER - # 192813
rslaughter@kvn.com
MICHELLE YBARRA - # 260697
mybarra@kvn.com
ALEXANDER DRYER - # 291625
adryer@kvn.com
633 Battery Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-1809
Telephone:
415 391 5400
Facsimile:
415 397 7188
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
THOMAS M. MCINERNEY - # 162055
tmm@ogletreedeakins.com
CHRISTOPHER M. AHEARN - # 239089
chris.ahearn@ogletreedeakins.com
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone:
415 442 4810
Facsimile:
415 442 4870
13
14
Attorneys for Defendant
LYFT, INC.
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
18
19
PATRICK COTTER and ALEJANDRA
MACIEL, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
20
21
22
23
Case No. 3:13-cv-04065-VC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING CLASS
CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE
v.
Judge:
Hon. Vince Chhabria
Date Filed:
Trial Date:
September 3, 2013
None Set
LYFT, INC.,
Defendant.
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE
Case No. 3:13-cv-04065-VC
955374
1
1
The undersigned parties, by and through their respective counsel, do hereby stipulate :
2
WHEREAS, on April 9, 2015, the Court issued the Amended Case Management Order
3
(Dkt. 110) requiring all discovery relating to class certification to be completed by no later than
4
September 24, 2015;
5
6
WHEREAS, the Court set the hearing for plaintiffs’ anticipated motion for class
certification for December 17, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.;
7
WHEREAS, the Court ordered the parties to confer and submit a stipulated proposed
8
briefing schedule in which the plaintiffs’ reply brief is filed no later than two weeks before the
9
hearing;
WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred and jointly request that the Court enter the
10
11
following order:
12
Plaintiffs shall file their Motion for Class Certification on October 8, 2015;
13
Defendant shall file its Opposition to the Motion for Class Certification on November 17,
14
2015; and
Plaintiffs shall file their Reply in Support of the Motion for Class Certification on
15
16
December 3, 2015.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
17
18
19
Dated: June 12, 2015
20
KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
By:
21
22
23
/s/ Michelle Ybarra
RACHAEL E. MENY
R. JAMES SLAUGHTER
MICHELLE YBARRA
ALEXANDER DRYER
Attorneys for Defendant
LYFT, INC.
24
25
26
27
28
1
As discussed at the hearing held on June 4, 2015, Plaintiffs may renew their request for an
accelerated hearing and briefing schedule on their motion for class certification if the Price v. Lyft
case is not stayed by the state court. Plaintiffs have agreed to this schedule on the assumption that
the hearing on Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in this case will remain December 17,
2015.
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE
Case No. 3:13-cv-04065-VC
955374
1
Dated: June 12, 2015
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK
& STEWART, P.C.
2
3
By:
4
5
/s/ Thomas M. McInerney
THOMAS M. MCINERNEY
CHRISTOPHER M. AHEARN
Attorneys for Defendant
LYFT, INC.
6
7
8
Dated: June 12, 2015
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
9
By:
10
/s/ Shannon Liss-Riordan
SHANNON LISS-RIORDAN
11
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
PATRICK COTTER and ALEJANDRA
MACIEL, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated
12
13
14
Dated: June 12, 2015
CARLSON LEGAL SERVICES
15
16
By:
17
18
/s/ Matthew D. Carlson
MATTHEW D. CARLSON
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
PATRICK COTTER and ALEJANDRA
MACIEL, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated
19
20
21
22
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
25
June 16, 2015
Dated: _______________________
_____________________________________
HONORABLE VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge
26
27
28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE
Case No. 3:13-cv-04065-VC
955374
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?