Kane v. Chobani, Inc

Filing 144

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh denying 137 Motion for Leave to File.(lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

KATIE KANE, an individual, DARLA BOOTH, )
an individual, and ARIANNA ROSALES, an
)
individual on behalf of themselves and all others )
similarly situated,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
CHOBANI, INC., also known as AGRO)
FARMA, INC.
)
)
Defendant.
)
)

Case No. 12-CV-02425-LHK
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
AND SETTING BRIEFING AND
HEARING SCHEDULE FOR
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION

The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of
18
July 12, 2013 Order on Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 137, and Defendant Chobani’s Opposition,
19
ECF No. 142.
20
Pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rule 7-9(b), a party seeking leave to file a
21
motion for reconsideration must show that:
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

(1) That at the time of the motion for leave, a material difference in fact or law exists from that
which was presented to the Court before entry of the interlocutory order for which
reconsideration is sought. The party also must show that in the exercise of reasonable
diligence the party applying for reconsideration did not know such fact or law at the time of
the interlocutory order; or
(2) The emergence of new material facts or a change of law occurring after the time of such
order; or
(3) A manifest failure by the Court to consider material facts or dispositive legal arguments
which were presented to the Court before such interlocutory order.
1
Case No.: 12-CV-02425-LHK
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND
SETTING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

1

The Court finds that Plaintiffs have not met the standard set forth in Local Rule 7-9(b).

2

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of July 12, 2013

3

Order on Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.

4
5
6
7

Accordingly, the Court sets the following schedule for Chobani’s Motion for
Reconsideration:
Chobani’s Motion for Reconsideration, not to exceed 15 pages, due on August 21, 2013;
Plaintiffs’ Opposition, not to exceed 15 pages, due on August 28, 2013; and
Chobani’s Reply, not to exceed 10 pages, due on September 3, 2013.

8

The hearing on Chobani’s Motion for Reconsideration will take place on Thursday, September 12,

9

2013, at 1:30 p.m.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

Dated: August 14, 2013

________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

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

2
Case No.: 12-CV-02425-LHK
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND
SETTING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION