Coulter-Owens v. Rodale, Inc.

Filing 33

STIPULATION AND ORDER denying without prejudice 2 Motion for Class Certification. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case No. 2:14-cv-12688

ROSE COULTER-OWENS,
individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,

Honorable Robert H. Cleland
Plaintiff,
v.
RODALE INC., a Pennsylvania
Corporation,
Defendant.
STIPULATION AND ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
This Stipulation is entered into by and among Plaintiff Rose Coulter-Owens
and Defendant Rodale Inc., by and through their respective counsel.
WHEREAS, Plaintiff Rose Coulter-Owens filed her Class Action Complaint
on July 9, 2014, (Dkt. 1);
WHEREAS, at the time Plaintiff filed her Complaint, she also filed a motion
for class certification requesting, among other things, that the Court reserve ruling
on the issue of class certification until after the Parties have had a sufficient
opportunity to commence and complete discovery related to requirements of Fed.
R. Civ. P. 23 for maintaining this action as a class action, (Dkt. 2). Plaintiff filed
her motion to protect against an attempt by Defendant to “buy off” her

1

representative claims by making a settlement offer before a motion for class
certification was pending before the Court. See Damasco v. Clearwire Corp., 662
F.3d 891, 896 (7th Cir. 2011) (“A simple solution to the buy-off problem . . . is
available. . . . Class-action plaintiffs can move to certify the class at the same time
that they file their complaint. The pendency of that motion protects a putative class
from attempts to buy off the named plaintiffs.”).1
NOW THEREFORE, the parties stipulate as follows:
1.

Upon execution and filing of this stipulation, the parties request that

the Court enter an order denying without prejudice Plaintiff’s Motion For Class
Certification. (Dkt 1.)
2.

Beginning from the time that the Court enters an order denying

without prejudice Plaintiff’s Motion For Class Certification, Defendant agrees that
in the event Defendant intends to make Plaintiff any individual settlement offer,
but before any such offer is made, Defendant will either (i) seek Plaintiff’s prior
consent or (ii) wait until Plaintiff first files a renewed motion for class certification.
//
//
//

1

The Sixth Circuit has not addressed whether a full settlement offer, made while a
class certification motion is not pending, renders a plaintiff’s individual and
representative claims moot.
2

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Respectfully submitted,
Date: March 25, 2015

ROSE COULTER-OWENS, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
/s/ Benjamin S. Thomassen
One of Plaintiff’s attorneys
Ari J. Scharg
[e-mail]
Benjamin S. Thomassen
[e-mail]
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Henry M. Scharg – P28804
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICE OF HENRY M. SCHARG
718 Ford Building
Detroit, Michigan 48226
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Counsel for Plaintiffs and the putative Class

3

Date: March 25, 2015

RODALE INC.,
/s/ Anthony T. Eliseuson
One of Defendant’s attorneys
Natalie J. Spears
Anthony T. Eliseuson
Kristen C. Rodriguez
DENTONS US LLP
233 South Wacker Drive
Suite 7800
Chicago, IL 60606
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Peter B. Kupelian (P31812)
Carol G. Schley (P51301)
CLARK HILL PLC
500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 3500
Detroit, MI 48226
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

IT IS SO ORDERED
Dated: March 25, 2015

_s/Robert H. Cleland
Honorable Robert H. Cleland
United States District Judge

4