Spears et al v. Washington Mutual, Inc. et al

Filing 380

STIPULATION AND ORDER 378 Extending Certain Pre-Trial Dates. Expert Discovery cutoff 9/5/2014; Mediation to be Completed by 9/25/2014; Dispositive Motion Hearing cutoff 8/22/2014. [Dkt. Nos. 376, 377 are termed as moot]. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 6/18/14. (jgS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/18/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 Janet Lindner Spielberg (SBN 221926) LAW OFFICES OF JANET LINDNER SPIELBERG 12400 Wilshire Boulevard, #400 Los Angeles, California 90025 Tel: (310) 392-8801 Fax: (310) 278-5938 Email: jlspielberg@jlslp.com Joseph N. Kravec, Jr. (pro hac vice) FEINSTEIN DOYLE PAYNE & KRAVEC, LLC 429 Forbes Avenue, 17th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Tel: (412) 281-8400 Fax: (412) 281-1007 E-mail: jkravec@fdpklaw.com 5 6 CO-LEAD CLASS COUNSEL 7 8 9 10 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 SAN JOSE DIVISION 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 FELTON A. SPEARS, JR. and ) Case No. 5-08-CV-00868 (RMW) SIDNEY SCHOLL, on behalf of themselves and ) all others similarly situated, ) STIPULATION AND [] ORDER ) EXTENDING CERTAIN PRE-TRIAL Plaintiffs, ) DATES vs. ) FIRST AMERICAN EAPPRAISEIT (a/k/a eAppraiseIT, LLC), a Delaware limited liability company, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulation and [] Order; CASE NO. 5-08-CV-00868 (RMW) 1 Plaintiffs Felton A. Spears, Jr. and Sidney Scholl (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and Defendant 2 eAppraiseIT, LLC (“EA;” collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of 3 record and pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, enter into the following stipulation for an order 4 extending certain pre-trial dates. This stipulation does not seek modification of the trial date or the 5 date currently scheduled for the pre-trial conference. 6 WHEREAS, on April 25, 2012, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification 7 of Plaintiffs’ claim under RESPA, 12 U.S.C. § 2607(a), certifying a Class of “All consumers in 8 California and throughout the United States who, on or after June 1, 2006, received home loans from 9 Washington Mutual Bank, FA in connection with appraisals that were obtained through 10 eAppraiseIT.” Dkt. No. 249, p. 12. 11 WHEREAS, per the Court’s November 6, 2013 Order (Dkt. 350) scheduling expert reports, 12 Plaintiffs served EA with experts’ reports from twelve experts on January 31, 2014. Plaintiffs served 13 one supplemental expert report via email to EA’s counsel and made four other supplemental reports 14 available EA via secure server on May 14, 2014. Plaintiffs emailed the remaining supplemental 15 experts to Defendant on May 15, 2014 upon learning that EA had trouble retrieving the reports off 16 the server the prior evening.1 17 18 WHEREAS, EA served no expert reports on January 31, 2014 and submitted six rebuttal reports on the June 6, 2014 rebuttal report deadline under this Court’s scheduling order. 19 WHEREAS, the parties have made reciprocal expert-related document requests, and EA has 20 advised that it anticipates substantially completing production of expert-related documents within 21 two weeks of submission of its rebuttal reports (i.e., by June 20, 2014). 22 WHEREAS, given the scope of the parties’ expert cases (totaling over eighteen experts, 23 including appraisal practice, appraisal review, appraisal inflation analysis, RESPA compliance and 24 damages experts) and the need for Plaintiffs to analyze the rebuttal reports as well as the expert- 25 related documents being produced thereafter, the parties need more time than is currently included in 26 the Court’s Scheduling Order (Dkt. 350) in order to: 1) complete certain expert depositions as 27 28 1 EA intends to move to strike the supplemental reports as improper and untimely supplementation. Stipulation and [] Order; CASE NO. 5-08-CV-00868 (RMW) 1 1 described below; and 2) include – if necessary – a discussion of certain of those expert depositions in 2 the parties’ respective opposition and reply briefs in connection with upcoming motions (including, 3 but not limited to, motions for summary judgment and a motion for decertification). 4 WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to conduct expert depositions in two phases, such that 5 the expert depositions that are potentially relevant to the upcoming motions for summary judgment 6 and other motion practice are completed by the time the parties’ opposition and reply briefs are due. 7 To minimize the burden on the parties during the briefing phase of these motions, the parties will 8 take only those expert depositions necessary for their opposition briefs prior to the filing of their 9 opposition briefs. Expert depositions necessary for their reply briefs will be taken after opposition 10 briefs are filed and prior to the filing of their reply briefs. All other expert depositions will be taken 11 after the filing of reply briefs, which the parties anticipate will include some twelve appraisal 12 reviewer experts (or fewer to the extent they are deposed earlier). The parties will work to schedule 13 depositions so they occur more than three business days prior to the respective opposition and reply 14 briefing deadlines. 15 WHEREAS, under the current Scheduling Order, expert discovery is now scheduled to close 16 on June 30, 2014 (just over three weeks after the production of Defendants’ rebuttal expert reports), 17 dispositive motions are scheduled to be heard on July 25, 2014, and the “other motion hearing cut- 18 off (other than motions in limine)” is set for August 22, 2014. 19 WHEREAS, the parties respectfully request that: 1) the expert discovery cutoff be extended 20 from June 30, 2014 to September 5, 2014; 2) the dispositive motion hearing cut-off be extended to 21 the same date as the “other motion hearing cut-off (other than motions in limine)”; and that the 22 Parties’ upcoming motions for summary judgment and decertification (and any other motions other 23 than motions in limine) be briefed according to the following briefing schedule, with the 24 understanding that one or more party(ies) may need to extend the time to respond to the motions, 25 which have not yet been filed: moving papers due July 1, 2014; opposition papers due July 25, 26 2014, and reply papers due August 8, 2014. Moreover, the parties have scheduled a mediation with 27 John Leo Wagner on September 17, 2014. Accordingly, in light of these requested changes and the 28 Stipulation and [ Order; CASE NO. 5-08-CV-00868 (RMW) 2 1 scheduled mediation date, the parties also respectfully request that the mediation cutoff date 2 (currently July 16, 2014) be extended to September 25, 2014. 3 WHEREAS, there have been three previous time modifications in this action. On March 27, 4 2013, the Court granted the Parties’ stipulation to extend the deadlines in this action by four months. 5 Dkt. No. 303. On August 30, 2013, the Court granted the Parties’ stipulation to further extend the 6 deadlines in the action by approximately one month. Dkt. No. 331. On November 6, 2013, the 7 Court extended the fact discovery deadline as to discovery from third party JPMorgan Chase Bank, 8 N.A. until December 22, 2013 and extended expert discovery and certain other deadlines to 9 accommodate this change. Dkt. No. 350. 10 WHEREAS, the requested time modification will affect no other deadlines in this action. 11 WHEREAS, for the reasons set forth herein, good cause exists to extend the dates requested 12 13 14 15 herein. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, that the following deadlines be adjusted as follows: Event New Deadline Expert Discovery Cut-Off Prior Deadline per November 6, 2013 Order (Dkt. #350) June 30, 2014 Mediation July 16, 2014 September 25, 2014 July 25, 2014 August 22, 2014 August 22, 2014 August 22, 2014 October 9, 2014 October 9, 2014 23 Dispositive Motion Hearing Cut-Off Other Motion Hearing CutOff (other than motions in limine) Pretrial Conference (hearing on motions in limine, agreed jury instructions and verdict forms, proposed voir dire) Pretrial Brief October 30, 2014 October 30, 2014 24 Trial Date November 24, 2014 November 24, 2014 16 September 5, 2014 17 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 27 28 Stipulation and ] Order; CASE NO. 5-08-CV-00868 (RMW) 3 1 Dated: June 12, 2014 FEINSTEIN DOYLE PAYNE & KRAVEC, LLC By: s/Joseph N. Kravec, Jr. Joseph N. Kravec, Jr., Co-Lead Class Counsel 2 3 4 5 Dated: June 12, 2014 By: s/Janet Lindner Spielberg Janet Lindner Spielberg, Co-Lead Class Counsel 6 7 LAW OFFICES OF JANET LINDNER SPIELBERG Dated: June 12, 2014 IRELL & MANELLA LLP 8 By: s/A. Matthew Ashley Attorneys for DEFENDANT 9 10 11 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 13 Dated: ________________________ 14 15 Honorable Ronald M. Whyte United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulation and [] Order; CASE NO. 5-08-CV-00868 (RMW) 4 _

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?