Veljanoski v. Juno Therapeutics, Inc. et al
Filing
123
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's 122 Motion for Leave to File Two Over-Length Motions. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (SWT)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
7
8
9
Case No. C16-1069RSM
10
11
In re JUNO THERAPEUTICS, INC.
12
13
ORDER GRANTING IN PART CLASS
PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVER-LENGTH
MOTIONS
14
This matter comes before the Court on Class Plaintiffs Gilbert Nguyen and Susan Tan’s
15
unopposed motion pursuant to LCR 7(f) for leave to file two over-length motions. Dkt. #122.
16
Plaintiffs seek 20 pages of briefing for both a motion for final approval of the settlement and a
17
18
motion for attorneys’ fees. Id. Both motions would normally be limited to 12 pages under LCR
19
7(e)(4). Plaintiffs cite as good cause the following: first, that this case “involves complex facts
20
involving alleged statements, misstatements, and/or omissions concerning clinical trials for
21
cancer treatments;” and second, because “Ninth Circuit case law sets forth multi-factored tests
22
23
24
for district courts to use in evaluating whether to approve (1) class-action settlements, and (2)
fee requests.” Id.
25
The Court finds Plaintiffs have established good cause to add pages to their motion for
26
final approval of settlement, but have failed to establish good cause for the attorneys’ fees
27
motion. Although this case may have an unusually complex fact pattern, the standards for
28
ORDER GRANTING IN PART CLASS PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE OVER-LENGTH MOTIONS - 1
1
2
granting fees are not particularly unique or onerous in this case, and it is this Court’s experience
that skilled counsel can make the arguments they need to make in 12 pages.
3
Having reviewed the relevant pleadings and the remainder of the record, the Court
4
hereby finds and ORDERS that Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for leave to file two over-length
5
6
7
motions, Dkt. #122, is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiffs are granted
leave to file up to 20 pages for their forthcoming motion for final approval of the settlement and
8
plan of distribution. Plaintiffs are urged to stick as close to the original 12 page limit as
9
possible. Any brief in opposition is automatically allowed an equal number of pages. See LCR
10
11
12
7(f)(4). The motion to file an overlength motion regarding attorney’s fees is DENIED.
DATED this 16 day of October, 2018.
13
14
15
16
A
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER GRANTING IN PART CLASS PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE OVER-LENGTH MOTIONS - 2
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?