Mendez v. R+L Carriers, Inc. et al

Filing 50

ORDER Granting 49 STIPULATION RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Motions due by 7/17/2012. Responses due by 8/7/2012. Replies due by 8/21/2012. Motion Hearing set for 9/20/2012 02:00 PM before Hon. Claudia Wilken. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 4/17/2012. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/17/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

David S. Eisen (SBN 100623)
Diana M. Estrada (SBN 212702)
Shirley Shu (SBN 231407)
Jennifer M. Millier (SBN 253814)
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ,
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
555 Flower Street, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, California 90071-2407
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

8
9

Attorneys for Defendant R+L Carriers, Inc. and
R+L Carriers Shared Services, LLC

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

ROBERT MENDEZ, an individual, RANDY J.
MARTINEZ, an individual, ANTHONY A.
HARANG, an individual, KEVIN JOHNSON,
SR., an individual on behalf of all others
similarly situated and the general public,

) Case No.:
CV 11-02478-CW
)
) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
) ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
R+L CARRIERS, INC.,
)
a Corporation, R+L CARRIERS SHARED
)
SERVICES, LLC, a Corporation, and DOES 1- )
10,
)
)
)
Defendants. )
)

25
26

It is hereby stipulated by and between Defendants R+L Carriers, Inc. and R+L Carriers

27

Shared Services, LLC (hereinafter “Shared Services”) and Plaintiffs Robert Mendez, Randy J.

28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
864500.2

1

Martinez, Anthony A. Harang, and Kevin Johnson, Sr. (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”), (jointly referred

2

to as the “Parties”) by and through their attorneys of record as follows:

3

WHEREAS, on April 5, 2012, Magistrate Judge Corley ordered the Parties to meet and

4

confer regarding: (1) communications with and the use of declarations obtained from putative

5

class members prior to March 23, 2012; and (2) a briefing schedule for Plaintiffs’ Motion for

6

Class Certification and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment/Partial Summary Judgment;

7

WHEREAS the Parties were ordered to submit a stipulation to the court by Monday, April

8

16, 2012, regarding their compromise concerning contacts with putative class members and the

9

use of declarations obtained from putative class members as well as the Parties’ proposed briefing

10

schedule for Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and Defendants’ Motion for Summary

11

Judgment/Partial Summary Judgment;

12

WHEREAS Shared Services and its counsel deny any wrongdoing in communicating with

13

and obtaining declarations from putative class members and hereby enter into this stipulation

14

solely as a good faith compromise at the behest of this court;

15

The Parties stipulate that a curative letter be sent to all putative class members and are

16

currently seeking the assistance of Magistrate Judge Corley to assist in resolving the terms of this

17

curative letter. The Parties have scheduled a call with Magistrate Judge Corley to take place on

18

April 23, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. In the event that the Parties are unable to come to an agreement as to

19

terms, the Parties anticipate seeking the further assistance of the Court;

20
21

The Parties agree and stipulate that the curative letter will be sent out to the putative class
members by way of U.S. regular mail as soon as the terms of the curative letter are finalized;

22

The Parties agree and stipulate that communications with putative class members, to the

23

extent agreed to under this stipulation, may commence on May 4, 2012, provided the dispute

24

surrounding the curative letter is resolved and the mailing of the curative letter to all class

25

members has been completed. If the dispute concerning the curative letter has not been resolved

26

and/or the mailing of the curative letter has not taken place by May 4, 2012, communications will

27

only commence after the dispute concerning the curative letter is resolved and seven (7) days has

28

lapsed since the mailing of the curative letter;
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
864500.2

1

The Parties agree and stipulate that this Court’s March 23, 2012, order temporarily

2

enjoining Shared Services’ communications with the putative class members be lifted subject to

3

the conditions set forth in the above paragraph, such that all precertification communications by

4

Shared Services may resume except as to the approximately 49 putative class members whose

5

declarations were obtained by Shared Services management but not by Shared Services counsel,

6

Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP (the “Subset”);

7

The Parties agree and stipulate that Plaintiffs’ counsel may communicate with any

8

individual in the Subset, and counsel for Shared Services may only communicate with those

9

individuals in the Subset from whom Plaintiffs’ counsel obtains declarations. Plaintiffs’ counsel

10

will advise defense counsel by July 3, 2012 of any such declarations obtain from those in the

11

subset;

12

The Parties agree and stipulate that declarations obtained from those in the Subset by

13

Shared Services management may only be used to oppose class certification if Plaintiffs counsel

14

has also obtained declarations from those same individuals in the subset;

15
16

The Parties agree and stipulate that Plaintiffs will withdraw their motion for a temporary
restraining order;

17

The Parties agree and stipulate that Shared Services can utilize declarations obtained by

18

defense counsel for all purposes and the declarations obtained by Shared Services management to

19

the extent agreed to above; and

20

The Parties further agree and stipulate that Shared Services’ motion for summary judgment

21

or partial summary judgment and Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification and will be filed and

22

heard in accordance with the following schedule:

23

A.

Initial motion filing: July 17, 2012

24

B.

Filing of oppositions: August 7, 2012

25

C.

Filing of reply: August 21, 2012

26

D.

Hearing: September 20, 2012 at 2 p.m.

27

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
864500.2

1

Dated: April 16, 2012

2

By: /s/ Diana M. Estrada
David S. Eisen
Diana M. Estrada
Attorneys for Defendants
R+L Carriers, Inc. and
R+L Carriers Shared Services, LLC

3
4
5
6

Dated: April 16, 2012

7

LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS W. FALVEY
By: /s/ J.D. Henderson
Thomas W. Falvey
J.D. Henderson
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Robert Mendex, Randy J. Martinez,
Anthony A. Harang, Kevin Johnson, Sr., and on behalf of all
others similarly situated and the general public

8
9
10
11

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP

Dated: April 16, 2012

ALEXANDER KRAKOW + GLICK LLP
By: /s/ Michael S. Morrison
Martin E. Krakow
Michael S. Morrison
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Robert Mendex, Randy J. Martinez,
Anthony A. Harang, Kevin Johnson, Sr., and on behalf of all
others similarly situated and the general public

12
13
14
15
16

**** ORDER ****

17

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19
Dated:

4/17/2012

____________

20
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
864500.2