Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Alger v. FCA US LLC, 2:18-cv-00360-MCE-EFB. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190107510 Visitors: 14
Filed: Jan. 04, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE; ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. , District Judge . Plaintiff Shawn Alger ("Plaintiff") and Defendant FCA US LLC f/k/a Chrysler Group LLC ("Defendant" or "FCA") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate as follows: STIPULATION WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his initial complaint on February 15, 2018 [Dkt. No. 1] and his class action complaint on February 16, 2018 [Dkt. No. 4]; WHEREAS, on April 9, 2018, th
More

STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE; ORDER

Plaintiff Shawn Alger ("Plaintiff") and Defendant FCA US LLC f/k/a Chrysler Group LLC ("Defendant" or "FCA") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

STIPULATION

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his initial complaint on February 15, 2018 [Dkt. No. 1] and his class action complaint on February 16, 2018 [Dkt. No. 4];

WHEREAS, on April 9, 2018, the Parties stipulated to the filing of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") and a briefing schedule on Defendant's potential motion to dismiss;

WHEREAS, on April 10, 2018, the Court entered an Order allowing Plaintiff to file his SAC by April 23, 2018 and granting the Parties' proposed briefing schedule [Dkt. No. 12];

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his SAC on April 23, 2018 [Dkt. No. 13] and Defendant filed its Answer to the SAC on May 14, 2018 [Dkt. No. 14];

WHEREAS, during the next month, Plaintiff served his first set of requests for production of documents ("RFPs") and interrogatories ("ROGs") and noticed a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition that included twenty-three topics and fourteen categories of document production;

WHEREAS, in June and July 2018, the Parties extensively met and conferred on discovery disputes, including on the noticed Rule 30(b)(6) deposition and competing provisions in their Joint Rule 26(f) Report, which was filed on August 1, 2018 [Dkt. No. 20];

WHEREAS, the Parties' meet and confer efforts on the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition reached an impasse, culminating in Defendant's motion for protective order [Dkt. No. 18] and Joint Statement Re Discovery Disagreement [Dkt. No. 21];

WHEREAS, Defendant's motion was heard on August 8, 2018;

WHREAS, on August 8, 2018, Defendant served a first set of RFPs and ROGs on Plaintiff;

WHEREAS, Magistrate Judge Brennan entered a Minute Order on August 8, 2018 denying Defendant's motion and directing the Parties to submit a Stipulation and Proposed Order designating the number of proposed witnesses and estimated time required for the deposition, as discussed at the hearing [Dkt. No. 22]. Pursuant to Judge Brennan's Minute Order, the Parties submitted their Stipulation on August 17, 2018 [Dkt. No. 23] and Judge Brennan entered an Order on the Parties' stipulated discovery topics, proposed witnesses, and estimated time periods on August 22, 2018 [Dkt. No. 24];

WHEREAS, less than a week later, Plaintiff served document subpoenas on Grammer Industries, Inc. and Grammer, Inc. ("Grammer"), a supplier of Active Headrest Restraint ("AHR") Systems at issue in this litigation;

WHEREAS, in September 2018, the Parties met and conferred on dates for the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, the Parties' respective responses to pending discovery requests, and initial disclosures;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel on September 14, 2018 [Dkt. No. 27] and Defendant filed a motion to compel on September 19, 2018 [Dkt. No. 29];

WHEREAS, the Parties continued to meet and confer on their outstanding discovery disputes and their respective motions were vacated;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff served his initial disclosures on September 19, 2018 and Defendant served its initial disclosures and supplemental initial disclosures on September 28, 2018;

WHEREAS, Defendant's Rule 30(b)(6) designees were deposed in Michigan on September 24, 2018 and October 1, 2018;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff served four deposition notices on Defendant employees on November 6, 20181 and served a deposition subpoena on Grammer on November 7, 2018, pursuant to Rules 30(b)(6) and 45;

WHEREAS, Defendant served a second set of RFPs and ROGs on Plaintiff on November 26, 2018 and Plaintiff served a second set of RFPs and ROGs on Defendant on December 7, 2018;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff deposed two of Defendant's employees in Michigan on December 10 and December 11, 2018;

WHEREAS, on December 13, 2018, Plaintiff noticed the deposition of two additional Defendant employees and served a third set of ROGs on December 17, 2018;

WHEREAS, Defendant has noticed Plaintiff's Vehicle Inspection for January 17, 2019 and the depositions of Plaintiff and his girlfriend, Alyssa Pfanner, for January 18, 2019;

WHEREAS, Grammer's Rule 30(b)(6) designee is not available for deposition until February 6, 2018 in Michigan;

WHEREAS, the Parties are meeting and conferring to coordinate deposition dates and times for three of Defendant's employees so that they occur during the same week as the Grammer Rule 30(b)(6) deposition in Michigan;

WHEREAS, the Parties are currently meeting and conferring on a protocol for Plaintiff's Vehicle Inspection, Defendant's document production and supplemental Rog responses, and potential search terms for Plaintiff's recent RFPs;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff is preparing responses to Defendant's second set of RFPs and ROGs and continuing to review documents produced by both Defendant and Grammer;

WHEREAS, discovery requests are still pending for both Parties;

WHEREAS, the Parties are engaged in multi-state discovery efforts, including third-party discovery, that involves a significant number of witnesses, anticipated experts, and implicates a significant number of vehicles;

WHEREAS, further discovery will be limited over the upcoming weeks due to the intervening holidays and Defendant's offices are closed over the next two weeks;

WHEREAS, the current deadline to complete all discovery with the exception of expert discovery is February 15, 2019 [Dkt. No. 3];

WHEREAS, it has become apparent that it will not be possible for the Parties to complete all fact discovery prior to the current February 15, 2019 deadline;

WHEREAS, the Parties have actively participated in discovery of this case;

WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred on extending the existing discovery period and have not previously sought to extend the current discovery deadline; and

WHEREAS, good cause exists to extend the discovery cut off by thirty days for the reasons described above.

NOW, THEREFORE, undersigned counsel for the Parties, having met and conferred, stipulate and agree as follows:

1. All discovery, with the exception of expert discovery, shall be completed no later than March 18, 2019.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Plaintiff was recently informed that one of the noticed depositions was served on Defendant's former employee. Accordingly, Plaintiff is currently meeting and conferring with Defendant on last known contact information for its former employee so that Plaintiff may make arrangements to serve him with a subpoena.
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