Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc

Filing 138

ORDER re the parties' 137 joint request to approve the proposed class notice plan. The Court GRANTS the parties' joint request for approval of the proposed class notice plan (Dkt. No. 137 ) and further ORDERS that expert reports must be disclosed by August 13, 2021. Signed by U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour. (PM)

Download PDF
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 10 VALERIE SAMPSON and DAVID RAYMOND, on their own behalf and on the behalf of all others similarly situated, 11 12 13 14 15 16 CASE NO. C17-0028-JCC ORDER Plaintiffs, v. KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION, INC., an Arizona corporation, KNIGHT REFRIGERATED, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, and KNIGHT PORT SERVICES, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, 17 Defendants. 18 19 This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ joint request to approve the proposed 20 class notice plan (Dkt. No. 137). Having thoroughly considered the parties’ briefing and the 21 relevant record, the Court finds oral argument unnecessary and hereby GRANTS the motion for 22 the reasons explained herein. 23 In June 2020, the Court certified a class of “[a]ll current and former driver employees of 24 Knight Transportation, Inc., Knight Refrigerated, LLC, and/or Knight Port Services, LLC who at 25 any time from July 1, 2013, through the date of final disposition, worked as drivers while 26 residing in the state of Washington.” (Dkt. No. 117 at 12.) In September 2020, notice was ORDER C17-0028-JCC PAGE - 1 1 distributed to then-existing class members. (Dkt. No. 118 at 3.) Because the original class 2 definition was open ended, new driver employees have become part of the class since then. 3 Earlier this month, the Court imposed an end date on the class, limiting it to drivers employed 4 through June 3, 2021. (Dkt. No. 136 at 11.) The parties now move for approval of their plan to 5 provide notice to the new class members to whom notice was not previously distributed. (Dkt. 6 No. 137 at 1–4.) The parties also ask the Court to extend the expert report deadline from July 23, 7 2021 to August 13, 2021. (Id. at 4.) 8 9 The Court must “direct to class members the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances, including individual notice to all members who can be identified through 10 reasonable effort.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). The class notice must be stated in “plain, 11 easily understood language” and contain: (i) the nature of the action; (ii) the definition of the 12 class certified; (iii) the class claims, issues, or defenses; (iv) that a class member may enter an 13 appearance through an attorney; (v) that the court will exclude from the class any member who 14 requests it; (vi) the time and manner for requesting exclusion; and (vii) the binding effect of a 15 class judgment on members. Id. 16 The Court FINDS that the parties’ proposed notice form and notice plan, (Dkt. Nos. 137- 17 2, 137-3), satisfy the elements of Rule 23. Further, the Court FINDS good cause to extend the 18 expert report deadline. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the parties’ joint request for approval of 19 the proposed class notice plan (Dkt. No. 137) and further ORDERS that expert reports must be 20 disclosed by August 13, 2021. 21 DATED this 22nd day of June 2021. 24 A 25 John C. Coughenour UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 26 ORDER C17-0028-JCC PAGE - 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?