Reny et al v. Unilever United States, Inc. et al

Filing 19

ORDER Granting 18 STIPULATION Dismissing this Action Without Prejudice. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong on 2/19/2014. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/19/2014)

1 AZRA Z. MEHDI (220406)
THE MEHDI FIRM, PC
2 One Market
3 Spear Tower, Suite 3600
San Francisco, CA 94105
4 [phone]
[phone] (fax)
5 [e-mail]
6 Local Counsel for Plaintiffs
7 SCHIFF HARDIN LLP
Jeffrey R. Williams (Bar No. 84156)
8 [e-mail]
Rocky N. Unruh (Bar No. 84049)
9 [e-mail]
Sarah D. Youngblood (Bar No. 244304)
10 [e-mail]
One Market, Spear Street Tower
11 Thirty-Second Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
12 Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
13
Attorneys for Defendants
14 Unilever United States, Inc. and Conopco, Inc. d/b/a Unilever Home & Personal Care USA
15
16
17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

18

)
JOSEPHINE WELLS and CATHERINE
)
19 RENY, on Behalf of Themselves and All
)
Others Similarly Situated,
20
)
Plaintiffs,
)
21
vs.
)
)
22
UNILEVER UNITED STATES, INC., LEK )
23 INC., and CONOPCO, INC. d/b/a UNILEVER )
HOME & PERSONAL CARE USA,
)
24
)
Defendants.
)
25
)
26
27
28

Case No.: 3:13-CV-04749-SBA
CLASS ACTION
STIPULATION AND ORDER
DISMISSING THIS ACTION WITHOUT
PREJUDICE
Local Rules 7-1(5) and 7-12

1

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-1(5) and 7-12, plaintiffs Josephine Wells and Catherine Reny

2 and defendants Unilever United States, Inc. and Conopco, Inc., by their respective counsel,
3

stipulate and agree as follows:1

4
1.

Because this matter has been resolved as part of a February 7, 2014 nationwide

5
6

class settlement in a related matter, Reid, et al. v. Unilever United States, Inc., et al., N.D. Ill.

7 Case No. 12-cv-6058 (the “Reid lawsuit”), subject to final approval, the parties respectfully ask
8 that this Court stay or dismiss this suit pending the final approval hearing in the Reid lawsuit,
9 currently set for July 9, 2014.
10
11

2.

Plaintiffs in this case assert a variety of claims relating to a hair care product, the

Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30 Day Smoothing Kit (the “Product”). Plaintiffs’

12
Complaint (Dkt. #1) asserts claims for breach of warranty, violation of consumer protection
13
14

statutes, false advertising, unjust enrichment, strict product liability and negligence/gross

15 negligence on behalf of (a) a putative class consisting of all persons who purchased the Product
16 in any state other than Alabama, Illinois, Kentucky, Nevada and Wisconsin or, in the alternative,
17 (b) all persons who purchased the Product in the state of California. Plaintiffs’ counsel have also
18
19

filed two other putative class actions alleging virtually identical claims: the Reid lawsuit, alleging
claims on behalf of residents of Alabama, Illinois, Nevada and Wisconsin; and Naiser v.

20
21
22

Unilever United States, Inc., W.D. Ky. Case No. 13-cv-395, alleging claims on behalf of
residents of Kentucky.
3.

23

On November 25, 2013, the parties filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order (Dkt.

24 #14) to stay all proceedings in this case until January 14, 2014 while the parties attempted to
25
26
27

1

Defendant LEK, Inc. has not yet been served with process, and is therefore not an “affected party” whose signature
is required under Civil L.R. 7-12.

28

1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
No.: 3:13-CV-04749-SBA

1 resolve all three cases (hereafter, the “Smoothing Kit Lawsuits”) through mediation. On
2 November 26, 2013, this Court entered an Order (Dkt. #15) granting the parties’ Stipulation and
3

staying all proceedings until January 14, 2014.

4
4.

On December 27, 2013, the Parties filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order (Dkt.

5
6

#16) to extend the previously entered stay of all proceedings in this matter to February 13, 2014,

7 defer all deadlines set forth in the Court’s October 16, 2013 Order Setting Initial Case
8 Management Conference and ADR Deadlines (Dkt. #4), and vacate the case management
9 conference that was scheduled for January 23, 2014. On December 30, 2013, the Court entered
10 the order requested by the parties and stayed all proceedings until February 13, 2014. Dkt. #17.
11

5.

On February 7, 2014, counsel for the named plaintiffs in this action — Josephine

12
Wells and Catherine Reny — along with Reid plaintiffs Sidney Reid, Alisha Barnett, Dawn
13
14

Damrow, and Fran Penell, and the Naiser plaintiffs Terri Naiser and Jonnie Phillips, signed and

15 presented a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) to the Reid court, agreeing to
16 the resolution of all three of the Smoothing Kit Lawsuits. Reid, Dkt. #90-1. The Settlement
17 Agreement provides, among other things, that plaintiffs Wells and Reny shall request that this
18
19

Court stay this action or dismiss it without prejudice pending final approval of the settlement. Id.,
¶18.

20
21
22

6.

On February 12, 2014, the Honorable Ruben Castillo of the Northern District of

Illinois granted preliminary approval of the settlement, incorporating the Settlement Agreement

23 by reference (¶1), preliminarily certifying a nationwide settlement class (¶6), and directing notice
24 to the nationwide settlement class (¶¶13–16). Reid, Dkt. #96. (The Parties have attached for this
25 Court a courtesy copy of the Preliminary Approval Order, as Exhibit 1 to this Stipulation.) In the
26

Order, Judge Castillo (i) added named plaintiffs Josephine Wells and Catherine Reny as

27
plaintiffs in the Reid action (¶2); (ii) incorporated the Settlement Agreement, which requires that
28

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
No.: 3:13-CV-04749-SBA

1 the parties move to dismiss or stay this action; (iii) stayed and suspended all pretrial proceedings
2 in Reid, and stayed and enjoined the defined Settlement Class Members from the filing or pursuit
3

of any other proceedings “based on, relating to, or arising out of the claims, assertions and causes

4
of action raised in the [Reid] Action and/or the Released Claims, or the facts and circumstances
5
6

relating to any of them” unless and until the court determines that a Settlement Class Member

7 has properly excluded himself or herself from the Settlement Class. Judge Castillo has set a Final
8 Approval hearing for July 9, 2014 at 1:30 p.m.
9

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED AND AGREED and the parties respectfully request

10 through this application that the Court enter an order extending the previously entered stay of
11

proceedings in this matter, including all discovery, or, in the alternative, that the Court dismiss

12
this action without prejudice, until such time as Judge Castillo issues an Order in the Reid case
13
14

regarding Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement.

15 DATED: February 18, 2014

19

THE MEHDI FIRM, PC
/s/
AZRA Z. MEHDI
One Market
Spear Tower, Suite 3600
San Francisco, CA 94105
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
[e-mail]

20

Local Counsel for Plaintiffs

16
17
18

21

DATED: February 18, 2014

22

SCHIFF HARDIN LLP
/s/
SARAH D. YOUNGBLOOD

23
Jeffrey R. Williams
[e-mail]
Rocky N. Unruh
[e-mail]
Sarah D. Youngblood
[e-mail]
One Market
Spear Street Tower, Thirty-Second Floor

24
25
26
27
28

3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
No.: 3:13-CV-04749-SBA

1

San Francisco, CA 94105
[phone]

2

Counsel for Defendants Unilever United States,
Inc. and Conopco, Inc.

3
4
5

I attest and certify that I received permission from defendants’ counsel before e-filing this

6 document and will retain proof of this permission.
7 DATED: February 18, 2014
8
9
10
11

THE MEHDI FIRM, PC
/s/
AZRA Z. MEHDI
One Market
Spear Tower, Suite 3600
San Francisco, CA 94105
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
[e-mail]

12
Local Counsel for Plaintiffs
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
No.: 3:13-CV-04749-SBA

1 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, THE COURT
2 ENTERS THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
3

By stipulation of the parties, this matter is dismissed without prejudice, with each side to

4
bear its own costs.
5
6

Dated: 2/19/2014

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER
No.: 3:13-CV-04749-SBA

________________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
UNITED STATES SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

2

I hereby certify that on, I authorized the electronic filing of the Stipulation and

3

[Proposed] Order Extending Stay or Dismissing this Action Without Prejudice, with the Clerk of

4
the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the e-mail
5
6
7

addresses denoted on the attached Electronic Mail Notice.
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the

8 foregoing is true and correct. Executed on February 18, 2014.
9
/s/
AZRA Z. MEHDI

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
No.: 3:13-CV-04749-SBA