Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

SEIFI v. MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC, 12-CV-05493 (TEH). (2013)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20130211556 Visitors: 16
Filed: Feb. 08, 2013
Latest Update: Feb. 08, 2013
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE BRIEFING DEADLINES AND HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND TO POSTPONE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; DECLARATION OF ROY A. KATRIEL IN SUPPORT THEREOF [N.D. CAL. L.R. 6-2] THELTON E. HENDERSON, District Judge. By and through their respective counsel of record, Plaintiffs Majeed Seifi and Tracey Deakin, as individuals and on behalf of all others similarly situated (collectively "Plaintiffs"), and Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC ("MBUSA") stipulate an
More

STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE BRIEFING DEADLINES AND HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE AND TO POSTPONE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; DECLARATION OF ROY A. KATRIEL IN SUPPORT THEREOF [N.D. CAL. L.R. 6-2]

THELTON E. HENDERSON, District Judge.

By and through their respective counsel of record, Plaintiffs Majeed Seifi and Tracey Deakin, as individuals and on behalf of all others similarly situated (collectively "Plaintiffs"), and Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC ("MBUSA") stipulate and agree as follows:

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME PURSUANT TO L.R. 6-2

1. On January 28, 2013, Defendant MBUSA filed a Motion to Transfer Venue (Dkt. No. 12), as well as a Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint and To Strike Class Allegations (Dkt. No. 9). Both motions were calendared for a hearing on March 4, 2013, making Plaintiffs' responses to both motions due by February 11, 2013, and MBUSA's replies due by February 19, 2013.

2. On February 5, 2013, the Court entered an Order vacating the briefing schedule and hearing date on MBUSA's Motion to Dismiss, indicating that it would hear the Motion to Transfer Venue first on the previously calendared date of March 4, 2013.

3. Plaintiffs respectfully request, and MBUSA does not oppose, a two-week extension of the briefing deadline for filing their opposition to MBUSA's Motion to Transfer Venue, which would make Plaintiffs' opposition due by February 25, 2013. Likewise, Plaintiffs do not oppose MBUSA's request for a corresponding three-week extension of time to file its reply in support of the Motion to Transfer Venue, making MBUSA's reply due by March 11, 2013. These requested extensions, if granted, would also require the postponement of the current hearing date on the pending motion until March 25, 2013.

4. As set forth in the accompanying Declaration of Roy A. Katriel, this extension request is being made in good faith because Plaintiffs' co-counsel who is a primary contact to one of the named plaintiffs, is and will be out of town on another pending matter over the next week, and also because, in response to MBUSA's Motion to Transfer Venue, Plaintiffs' counsel intend to submit certain Declarations or Affidavits that must be obtained from their clients and refer to factual information, which will require additional time to gather, review, and prepare.

4. Plaintiffs have not previously sought any continuance on any of the pending motions, and granting this request would not delay or affect any other pending deadlines, as there are no such deadlines currently in place.

5. The Court has also calendared the Case Management Conference for April 29, 2013, with the Joint Case Management Statement due on April 22, 2013. Because the Court is not yet even scheduled to hear MBUSA's Motion to Dismiss, and resolution of the Motion To Transfer Venue may remain pending by those dates, the parties jointly request that, in order to preserve judicial resources and promote judicial economy, the Case Management Conference be continued to June 24, 2013, with the Joint Case Management Conference due on June 17, 2013. That continuance would, in turn, grant the parties up to and until June 3, 2013 to hold their Rule 26(f) Conference.

6. Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Local R. 6-2, the parties seek approval of this stipulated request for an order changing time, as the agreements set forth herein affect certain dates otherwise fixed the Local Rules of this Court.

7. As there are no other scheduled matters in this case, the requested time modification would have no effect on the schedule for the case.

Respectfully submitted.

DECLARATION OF ROY A. KATRIEL IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE BRIEFING DEADLINES, HEARING DATE, AND CMC

I, Roy A. Katriel, declare and state as follows:

1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice before this Court, and am associated with The Katriel Law Firm, counsel for Plaintiffs Majeed Seifi and Tracey Deakin in the above-entitled action. The matters referred to in this Declaration are based upon my best personal knowledge and belief, and if called and sworn as a witness, I could and would competently testify as to each of them.

2. Under the current briefing schedule, Plaintiffs' response to MBUSA's Motion To Transfer Venue would be due no later than February 11, 2013. My co-counsel, Gary Graifman, who is the primary contact to one of the named plaintiffs, is currently traveling on another court matter and his absence from the office and unavailability during his work travel unduly impacts Plaintiffs' ability to respond to the pending Motion to Transfer Venue by the February 11th deadline. Further, it is my intent to submit a Declaration or Affidavit from one or more of the named plaintiffs as part of the opposition to MBUSA's pedning Motion to Transfer Venue. This Declaration or Affidavit requires the gathering and review of facts from the client(s) that is likely to require a longer period of time than would be available if Plaintiffs' opposition were required to be filed by next Monday, February 11, 2013.

5. As set forth in the accompanying Stipulated Request, the parties respectfully request that the briefing, hearing, and Case Management deadlines be modified as follows:

Opposition to Motion to Transfer New Deadline: February 25, 2013 Reply to Motion to Transfer Venue New Deadline: March 11, 2013 New Hearing Date on Motion to Transfer Venue: March 25, 2013 New Case Management Conference Date: June 24, 2013 Joint Case Management Statement New Deadline: June 17, 2013 Last Day To Hold Rule 26(f) Conference: June 3, 2013

6. As there are no other scheduled matters in this case, the requested time modification would have no effect on the schedule for the case.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.

ORDER

For good cause shown, the Court hereby enters the Stipulation set forth above as the Order of the Court. The schedule in this case is hereby modified as follows:

Opposition to Motion to Transfer New Deadline: February 25, 2013 Reply to Motion to Transfer Venue New Deadline: March 11, 2013 New Hearing Date on Motion to Transfer Venue: March 25, 2013 New Case Management Conference Date: June 24, 2013 Joint Case Management Statement New Deadline: June 17, 2013 Last Day To Hold Rule 26(f) Conference: June 3, 2013

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer