Dunn v. Teachers Insurance & Annuity Association of America, A New York Entity et al

Filing 109

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting in Part 103 Plaintiffs' Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Class Certification. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/3/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

KATHLEEN DUNN, et al.,

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Plaintiffs,
v.
TEACHERS INSURANCE & ANNUITY
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, et al.,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR AN
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
MOTION FOR CLASS
CERTIFICATION

Defendants.
___________________________________/

(Docket No. 103)

12
13

No. C-13-5456 EMC

14
15
16

Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for a nine week extension of time to file their

17

motion for class certification. Docket No. 103. Plaintiffs’ request is GRANTED in part. For good

18

cause shown, the Court will grant Plaintiffs a five week extension. Given Plaintiffs’ delay in

19

effectuating discovery, no further extension is warranted. Plaintiffs’ class certification motion shall

20

be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 11, 2014. Defendants’ opposition shall be filed by

21

5:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 15, 2015. Plaintiffs’ reply brief shall be filed by 5:30 p.m. on

22

Thursday, February 19, 2015. The class certification motion hearing is reset for 1:30 p.m. on

23

Thursday, March 5, 2015.

24

Plaintiffs’ request that the Court order Defendants to present thirteen named individuals for

25

deposition is DENIED. As an initial matter, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30 permits only 10

26

depositions to occur without leave of the court. See Giuliano v. SanDisk Corp., No. C10-02787,

27

2013 WL 3942943, at *5 (N.D. Cal. July 29, 2013) (“Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30,

28

each party is limited to ten depositions, absent a court order permitting additional depositions.”).

1

Plaintiffs have failed to cite any authority or make any substantive argument in support of their

2

request to conduct more than ten (10) depositions. He has failed to establish cause for the additional

3

depositions. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ request to exceed ten (10) depositions is denied.

4

Both sides are admonished that the Court expects the parties to cooperate fully with each

5

other during the discovery process. Specifically, the parties will meet and confer regarding

6

discovery response deadlines, deposition dates, and the like and will arrive at reasonable

7

stipulations. In the highly unlikely event that the parties reach an impasse on a discovery issue, the

8

parties will promptly bring that issue to the Court’s attention as provided for in this Court’s Standing

9

Orders.
This order disposes of Docket No. 103.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Dated: November 3, 2014

15
_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2