Smith v. Happy's Pizza Franchise, LLC et al
ORDER granting in part plaintiff's Motion to enlarge time period for limited discovery period on employer issue 118 (to 5/13/13) Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
DARRICK SMITH, on behalf of himself
and all other persons similarly
situated known or unknown,
Case No. 12-CV-11462
HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH
HAPPY’S PIZZA FRANCHISE, LLC, et al.,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO ENLARGE
TIME PERIOD FOR DISCOVERY ON EMPLOYER ISSUE (#118)
This case is a collective action in which plaintiffs allege defendants violated the Fair
Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §201 et seq., by failing to pay overtime wages. On
January 18, 2013, the court granted plaintiffs’ Rule 56(d) motion and set a deadline of April
12, 2013 for completing discovery relating to the issue of whether Happy’s Pizza Franchise,
LLC and Happy Asker are employers under the FLSA. On March 22, 2013, plaintiffs filed
a motion to enlarge the limited discovery period until June 3, 2013. Plaintiffs represent that
defendants’ written responses to discovery were a month late and that defendants still have
not produced documents. Plaintiffs also state that they have twice asked defendants
Happy’s Pizza Franchise, LLC and Happy Asker to agree to a 45-day extension of the
discovery deadline. For these reasons, the court GRANTS in part plaintiffs’ motion to
enlarge the limited discovery period and sets a new deadline of May 13, 2013.
Dated: March 26, 2013
s/George Caram Steeh
GEORGE CARAM STEEH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record and
on Joseph N. Newbold, Freeborn & Peters, LLP, 311 South
Wacker Drive, Suite 3000, Chicago, IL 60606 and
Maureen Ann Salas, Werman Law Offices, PC, 77 W.
Washington, Suite 1402, Chicago, IL 60602, on
March 26, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
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?