Greenwood v. Compucredit Corporation et al

Filing 326

ORDER re 323 Granting Stipulation Enlarging Time for Discovery. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 9/8/2010. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2010)

Download PDF
Greenwood v. Compucredit Corporation et al Doc. 326 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JAY SMITH (California Bar No. 166105) (Email: js@gslaw.org) ADRIAN BARNES (California Bar No. 253131) (Email: abarnes@gslaw.org) LINDA S. FANG (California Bar No. 240245) (Email: lfang@gslaw.org) GILBERT & SACKMAN, A Law Corporation 3699 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1200 Los Angeles, California 90010 Tel: (323) 938-3000, Fax: (323) 937-9139 STEVEN A. MARTINO (pro hac vice) (Email: stevemartino@taylormartino.com) W. LLOYD COPELAND (pro hac vice) (Email: lloyd@taylormartino.com) KASIE M. BRASWELL (pro hac vice) (Email: kasie@taylormartino.com) TAYLOR MARTINO ZARZAUR, P.C. 51 St. Joseph Street Mobile, Alabama 36602 Tel: (251) 433-3131, Fax: (251) 405-5080 GREGORY HAWLEY (pro hac vice) (Email: ghawley@waadlaw.com) U. W. CLEMON (pro hac vice) (Email: uwclemon@waadlaw.com) CHRISTOPHER J. NICHOLSON (pro hac vice) (Email: cnicholson@waadlaw.com) REBECCA G. DEPALMA (pro hac vice) (Email: rdepalma@whitearnolddowd.com) WHITE ARNOLD & DOWD, P.C. 2025 Third Avenue North, Suite 500 Birmingham, Alabama 35203 Tel: (205) 323-1888, Fax: (205) 323-8907 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Wanda Greenwood, Ladelle Hatfield, and Deborah McCleese IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION WANDA GREENWOOD, LADELLE HATFIELD, and DEBORAH MCCLEESE, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION; COLUMBUS BANK AND TRUST, jointly and individually, Defendants. Case No. 4:08-cv-4878 CW (EDL) Assigned to the Honorable Claudia Wilken LIMITED STIPULATION ENLARGING TIME FOR DISCOVERY; [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 4:08-CV-4878 CW (EDL) STIPULATION ENLARGING TIME FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY RESPONSES, DEPOSITIONS; [PROPOSED] ORDER Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2, Plaintiffs and Defendant CompuCredit Corporation ("CompuCredit") (collectively, "Parties"), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: WHEREAS, the discovery cut-off date was August 31, 2010, and the deadline for any motions to compel is seven days after that date, or September 7, 2010; and WHEREAS, at Plaintiffs' request, CompuCredit voluntarily agreed to produce CompuCredit employee Rick Gilbert and former CompuCredit employee Rick Huddleston for deposition in August but, due to scheduling problems, the parties have agreed to reschedule those depositions for September; and WHEREAS, on September 2, 2010, CompuCredit served Plaintiffs' counsel with Amended Responses to Plaintiffs' Third Set of Special Interrogatories and Plaintiffs' Fifth Set of Requests for Production, and, as such, agrees that Plaintiffs may have until September 9, 2010 within which to bring a motion to compel with regard to same, if necessary; and WHEREAS, on September 3, 2010, CompuCredit attempted to serve Plaintiffs' counsel with the telephone numbers and email addresses (to the extent maintained by CompuCredit) of the UCL class members, and, as such, agrees that Plaintiffs may have seven (7) days after receipt of said telephone numbers and email addresses within which to bring a motion to compel with regard to same, if necessary; and WHEREAS, on August 24, 2010, Plaintiffs' counsel provided CompuCredit with a list of column headings and codes from the class member database for which Plaintiffs' counsel required further explanation and, further, that CompuCredit has agreed to cooperate with Plaintiffs' counsel to provide such further explanation by no later than September 13, 2010 and, further, agrees that Plaintiffs may have seven (7) days after receipt of such further explanation within which to bring a motion to compel with regard to same, if necessary; and WHEREAS, on August 31, 2010, Plaintiffs' counsel requested that CompuCredit provide an updated version of the declaration previously submitted by John Hogan dated June 28, 2010 and, further, that CompuCredit has agreed to do so by no later than September 13, 2010 and, further, agrees that CASE NO. 4:08-CV-4878 CW (EDL) 1 STIPULATION ENLARGING TIME FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY RESPONSES, DEPOSITIONS; [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Plaintiffs may have seven (7) days after receipt of the updated version of the declaration within which to bring a motion to compel with regard to same, if necessary; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to avoid any further discovery disputes; and WHEREAS, the parties do not wish to delay the litigation of this case or continue the discovery cut-off date generally, and the time modification will not affect any of the current deadlines in the case. IT IS SO STIPULATED. DATED: September 7, 2010 GILBERT & SACKMAN A LAW CORPORATION s/ Adrian Barnes Adrian Barnes Attorneys for Plaintiffs Wanda Greenwood, Ladelle Hatfield, and Deborah McCleese DATED: September 7, 2010 MCGUIREWOODS LLP By: s/ Susan L. Germaise Susan L. Germaise Attorneys for Defendant CompuCredit Corporation I, Adrian Barnes, am the ECF user filing the above Limited Stipulation Enlarging Time for Discovery. In compliance with General Order 45, I hereby attest that Susan L. Germaise concurred in this filing. DATED: September 7, 2010 GILBERT & SACKMAN A LAW CORPORATION By: s/ Adrian Barnes Adrian Barnes Attorneys for Plaintiffs Wanda Greenwood, Ladelle Hatfield, and Deborah McCleese By: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CASE NO. 4:08-CV-4878 CW (EDL) [PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. September 8, 2010 Dated: ______________________ __________________________________________ Hon. Claudia Wilken United States District Judge 2 STIPULATION ENLARGING TIME FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY RESPONSES, DEPOSITIONS; [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?