Monteville Sloan, Jr. v. General Motors LLC

Filing 69

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 68 Stipulation and Proposed Order Re Briefing Of Motion To Dismiss Second Amended Complaint And Case Management Conference filed by General Motors LLC Case Management Statement due by 12/7/2017. Initial Case Management Conference reset for 12/14/2017 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Motion to Dismiss due 10/10/2017. Motion to Dismiss hearing set for 12/14/17 at 1:30 p.m. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/14/17. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/14/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 JOSEPH J. YBARRA (SBN 218130) Joseph.Ybarra@hysmlaw.com HUANG YBARRA SINGER & MAY LLP 550 South Hope Street, Suite 1850 Los Angeles, California 90071 Tel.: (213) 884-4902 Fac.: (213) 884-4910 8 GREGORY R. OXFORD (SBN 62333) goxford@icclawfirm.com ISAACS CLOUSE CROSE & OXFORD LLP 21515 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 950 Torrance, California 90503 Tel.: (310) 316-1990 Fac.: (310) 316-1330 9 Attorneys for Defendant General Motors LLC 6 7 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 MONTEVILLE SLOAN, JR., RAUL SIQUEIROS, TODD AND JILL CRAWLEY; JOSEPH BRANNAN, LARRY GOODWIN, MARC PERKINS, DONALD LUDINGTON, THOMAS SHORTER, DERICK BRADFORD, GABRIEL DEL VALLE, KEVIN HANNEKEN, EDWIN AND KATELYN DOEPEL, DAN MADSON, JAMES FAULKNER, JOSEPH OLIVIER, SCOTT SMITH, ROSS DAHL, DREW PETERSON, MICHAEL WARE, STEVE KITCHEN, BARBARA MOLINA, DENNIS VITA, STEVEN EHRKE, THOMAS GULLING, RONALD JONES, MIKE WARPINSKI, WILLIAM MARTELL, JOHN GRAZIANO, JOSHUA BYRGE, RUDY SANCHEZ, CHRISTOPHER THACKER, RANDY CLAUSEN, KELLY HARRIS, JAMES ROBERTSON, and JONAS BEDNAREK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 24 27 28 STIPULATION AND ORDER RE BRIEFING OF MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Plaintiffs, 25 26 Case No. 3:16-cv-07244-EMC v. GENERAL MOTORS LLC, Defendant. 1 STIPULATION RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CMC CASE NO. 3:15-CV-07244-EMC 1 WHEREAS, the Court, on August 1, 2017, issued an Order granting the motion of 2 defendant General Motors, LLC (“GM”) to dismiss plaintiffs’ First Amended Class Action 3 Complaint, with leave to amend (Dkt. No. 62); 4 5 6 7 WHEREAS, plaintiffs, on August 31, 2017, filed their Second Amended Class Action Complaint (Dkt. No. 67); WHEREAS, GM’s response to the Second Amended Complaint presently is due on September 14, 2017 pursuant to Rule 15(a)(3); 8 WHEREAS, the 231-page, 1,753-paragraph Second Amended Complaint includes seven 9 new plaintiffs, two new states, and 113 separate causes of action (not including claims for breach 10 of express warranty that plaintiffs have included “strictly to preserve them for purposes of 11 appeal,” see SAC p. 59 n. 40); 12 13 14 15 WHEREAS, GM intends to move under Rule 12 to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint and has requested additional time to prepare the Motion; WHEREAS, plaintiffs anticipate the need for additional time to prepare an Opposition to the motion; 16 WHEREAS, the parties have agreed, subject to the Court’s approval, upon the following: 17 1. 18 GM shall have until October 10, 2017 to file its Motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint; 19 2. 20 to GM’s Motion; 21 3. 22 Plaintiffs shall have until November 15, 2017 to file their response in Opposition November 30, 2017 GM shall have until December 1, 2017 to file any Reply in further support of its Motion; 23 4. 24 the Court; 25 5. 26 Motion: thirty-five (35) pages [GM intends to try to limit its Motion to 25 pages] 27 Opposition: thirty-five (35) pages The hearing on GM’s Motion shall be set on any later date that is convenient for December 14, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. The following page limits shall apply to the briefing of GM’s Motion: 28 2 STIPULATION RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CMC CASE NO. 3:15-CV-07244-EMC 1 Reply: twenty (20) pages if plaintiffs’ Opposition exceeds 25 pages, and 2 fifteen (15) pages if plaintiffs’ Opposition does not exceed 25 pages 3 WHEREAS, the Court has set a Case Management Conference for September 21, 2017; 4 WHEREAS, the parties believe that it would serve both judicial economy and the parties’ 5 interest in conserving their legal resources to continue the Case Management Conference until 6 after the Court’s ruling on GM’s Motion, 7 8 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between plaintiffs and GM, by and through their undersigned counsel, that the Court may enter its order as follows: 9 1. 10 approved. 11 2. The parties’ agreements on briefing schedule and page limits set forth above are The Case Management Conference set for September 21, 2017 is vacated. The 12 parties will submit Case Management Statements within thirty days after the Court issues its 13 ruling on GM’s motion, with the Case Management Conference to be set thereafter at a date and 14 time convenient for the Court. 15 DATED: September 11, 2017 16 /s/ Adam J. Levitt Adam J. Levitt /s/ Gregory R. Oxford Gregory R. Oxford DICELLO LEVITT & CASEY LLC Ten North Dearborn Street, Eleventh Floor Chicago, Illinois 60602 Telephone: 312-214-7900 alevitt@dlcfirm.com ISAACS CLOUSE CROSE & OXFORD LLP 21515 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 950 Torrance, California 90503 Telephone: 310-316-1990 goxford@icclawfirm.com 550 South Hope Street, Suite 1850 Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 884-4902 Joseph.Ybarra@hysmlaw.com 23 24 Counsel for General Motors LLC 25 26 28 Dated: September 14 __, 2017 S DISTRICT TE C TA __________________________________ ERED O ORD D IT IS S United OStates District Judge IE M DIF AS n 3 d M. Che e Edwar RT U O 27 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED, (as revised above and on p. 2) NO R NIA 22 ________ Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Proposed HUANG YBARRA SINGER & MAY Classes LLP FO 21 RT Judg STIPULATION RE MOTION TO DISMISS AND CMC ER C CASE NO. 3:15-CV-07244-EMC N OF D H LI 20 A 19 S 18 UNIT ED 17 CMC reset for 12/14/17 at 1:30 p.m. A joint CMC statement shall be filed by 12/7/17. IS T RIC T

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?