Moeller et al v. Taco Bell Corp.

Filing 659

ORDER Re: Discovery Status Conference 656 . Signed by Judge Nathanael M. Cousins on 12/7/11. (nclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/7/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

9
10
11

FRANCIE E. MOELLER, EDWARD MUEGGE,
KATHERINE CORBETT, and CRAIG THOMAS
YATES,

ORDER RE: DISCOVERY STATUS
CONFERENCE

Plaintiffs,

12
v.

13
14

Case No. 02-cv-05849 PJH (NC)

Re: Docket No. 656

TACO BELL CORP.,

15

Defendant.

16
17
The Court held a discovery status conference on December 7, 2011. After considering

18
19

the representations made by the parties at the conference, the Court orders the following:
(1) Plaintiffs’ request to bifurcate discovery into certification-related discovery and

20
21

damages-related discovery is DENIED.
(2) Plaintiffs must respond to Taco Bell’s twenty-third set of interrogatories and twenty-

22
23

second set of requests for production of documents with respect to twenty class members only.

24

By December 14, 2011, Taco Bell must identify to Plaintiffs the twenty class members regarding

25

whom it wishes to obtain interrogatory responses and documents. After Taco Bell submits its list

26

to Plaintiffs, Taco Bell may not substitute or add class members to that list without leave of

27

Court. No further written discovery is permitted without leave of Court.
(3) By February 15, 2012, Taco Bell may conduct up to 35 depositions of class members

28

02-cv-05849 PJH (NC)
ORDER RE: DISCOVERY
STATUS CONFERENCE
Case N o.

1

in preparation for its briefing on class certification. Each deposition may not exceed 90 minutes

2

without leave of Court. The parties must follow the procedure for noticing depositions described

3

in the order issued by this Court on November 9, 2011. See Dkt. No. 647. If any party believes

4

that modifications to this procedure would be appropriate, that party must submit a written

5

request to the Court containing its proposed modifications and the basis for its request.

6
7

(4) Taco Bell’s request to re-depose the named plaintiffs in preparation for its briefing on
class certification is DENIED.

8
9

(5) The Court will hold a telephonic discovery status conference on January 11, 2012, at
2:00 p.m. Lead counsel must participate in the conference.

10

(6) By March 16, 2012, Taco Bell may file its opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion to amend

11

the class definition, Dkt. No. 646, and its reply in support of its motion for class decertification,

12

Dkt. No. 611.

13
14

(7) Plaintiffs may file their reply to Taco Bell’s opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to amend
the class definition by April 6, 2012.

15

Judge Hamilton will set hearing dates on the motions once they are fully briefed.

16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

DATED: December 7, 2011

____________________________
NATHANAEL M. COUSINS
United States Magistrate Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02-cv-05849 PJH (NC)
ORDER RE: DISCOVERY
STATUS CONFERENCE
Case N o.

2