Vigil Rogelio et al v. Con-Way Freight, Inc.

Filing 38

STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING SCHEDULING ORDER re 37 . Case Management Conference set for 9/30/2011 10:30 AM in Courtroom 3, 5th Floor, San Jose. Motion for Class Certification Hearing set for 9/16/2011 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 5th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Jeremy Fogel. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 4/14/11. (dlm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2011)

1 R. Duane Westrup, Esq. (SBN 58610)
Lawrence R. Cagney, Esq. (SBN 141845)
2 [e-mail]
WESTRUP KLICK, LLP
3 444 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 1614
Long Beach, California 90802
4 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
5
Michael L. Carver, Esq. (SBN 173633)
6 Michelle M. Lunde, Esq. (SBN 246585)
LABOR LAW OFFICE
7 A Professional Corporation
1600 Humboldt Road, Suite 3
8 Chico, California 95928
Telephone: [phone]
9 Facsimile: [phone]
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff
JORGE R. QUEZADA, individually and on behalf of all
11 others similarly situated
12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
JORGE R. QUEZADA, individually, and on
17 behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

18
19

v.

20
CON-WAY INC., and CON-WAY FREIGHT
21 INC.,
22

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. C10 00100 JF
STIPULATION AND -----------------[PROPOSED]
ORDER MODIFYING
SCHEDULING ORDER
Case No. C 09-03670 JF

Complaint Filed: February 17, 2009

23
24
25 TO THE HONORABLE COURT AND THE CLERK OF THE COURT:
26

TAKE NOTICE THAT the undersigned counsel of record for Plaintiffs and Defendant

27 hereby stipulate and request that the Court enter the following Order forthwith:
28
STIP AND [PROP] ORD TO MODIFY CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1

WHEREAS, Defendants and Plaintiff Quezada agreed that Defendant had priority in taking

2 Plaintiff Quezada’s deposition before taking Defendant’s Person Most Knowledgeable deposition;
3

WHEREAS, Defendant completed the deposition of Plaintiff Quezada on October 18,

4 2010.
5

WHEREAS, after entering into the priority agreement respecting Plaintiff Quezada,

6 counsel for Quezada assumed the representation of Plaintiffs Colon Vigil and Fonseca.
7

WHEREAS, Defendants asserted that the deposition priority agreement applied to all

8 Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs disagreed with that contention, but attempted to work cooperatively to
9 schedule all of the necessary depositions.
10

WHEREAS, the Court has granted one prior sixty day extension of the class certifcation

11 briefing schedule to accommodate the parties’ difficulties in scheduling the Vigil, Fonseca and
12 Colon depositions. Defendant completed the depositions of Plaintiffs Vigil and Fonseca on March
13 3 and 4. Plaintiff Colon has withdrawn from the position of representative plaintiff due to a
14 medical condition that impaired his ability to perform the functions of a class representative.
15

WHEREAS, Plaintiff unsuccessfully attempted to schedule the depositions of Defendant

16 pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) on mutually agreeable dates and ultimately served deposition notices for
17 such deposition on the unilaterally selected dates of March 15 and 16, 2011 in order to complete
18 this essential discovery in suffucient time to meet the impending deadline for the filing of
19 Plaintiff’s motion for class certification on April 15, 2010. Defendant’s counsel has served written
20 objections to such deposition notices on multiple grounds including his unavailability on the
21 noticed dates and the noticed location for the deposition, San Francisco.
22

WHEREAS, Defendant’s counsel has previously been unable to commit to mutually

23 agreeable deposition dates due to the pendency of hotly contested motions and a trial set to begin in
24 an unrelated matter in San Francisco on May 2, 2011. Based on the foregoing , Defendant requires
25 a brief further interval in order to prepare for and submit to deposition by Plaintiff.
26

WHEREAS, the parties agree that a continuance of forty-five days of the current briefing

27 schedule will allow sufficient time for the parties to complete certification-related discovery and
28 allow Plaintiffs to prepare their motion.
2
STIP AND [PROP] ORD TO MODIFY CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1

NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby request, based on the showing of good cause

2 discussed herein, that Plaintiff Colon be dismissed without prejudice as a named Plaintiff and that
3 the certification briefing schedule be continued forty-five days as follows:
4

(1)

Certification Motion Filing Date: no later than May 31, 2011;

5

(2)

Opposition Filing Date: no later than July 29, 2011;

6

(3)

7

(4)

8

(6)

Reply Deadline: no later than August 29, 2011;
16
--- 2011 at 9:00 a.m.; and
Hearing Date: Sept. 12,
30
---- 2011 at 10:30 a.m.
Further Case Management Conference: Sept. 26,

9

All counsel agree that the only change in the status of the case since the Case Management

10 Conference has been the Court’s prior sixty day extension of the briefing schedule and further
11 discovery as described above. This is the second request for a continuance of dates requested by
12 the parties.
13 Dated: April 5, 2011
14
/s/
KENNETH O’ BRIEN
ERICA H. KELLEY
LITTLER MENDELSON
A Professional Corporation
Attorneys for Defendant
CON-WAY FREIGHT INC.

15
16
17
18

_

19 Dated: April 5, 2011
20
/s/
_
R. DUANE WESTRUP
LAWRENCE R. CAGNEY
WESTRUP KLICK, LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
JORGE R. QUEZADA AND ROBERT
COLON

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

STIP AND [PROP] ORD TO MODIFY CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1 Dated: April 6, 2011
2
/s/
_
JONATHAN CHE GETTLEMAN
Attorney for Plaintiffs
JOSE ALBERTO FONSECA PINA AND
ROGELIO VIGIL

3
4
5
6
7

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF COLON IS

8 HEREBY DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS A NAMED PLAINTIFF AND THE
9 BRIEFING SCHEDULING ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION BE
10 MODIFIED AS DESCRIBED ABOVE.
11
12
4/14/11
13 Dated: _______________

________________________________
THE HONORABLE JEREMY FOGEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4

STIP AND [PROP] ORD TO MODIFY CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE