Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Stiles v. Walmart Inc., 2:14-cv-02234-MCE-CMK. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20191210a37 Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 09, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 09, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON CERTAIN ISSUES RAISED IN PENDING MOTIONS TO COMPEL FROM DECEMBER 11, 2019 TO JANUARY 15, 2020 DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs Sharidan Stiles and Stiles 4 U, Inc. ("plaintiffs") and defendant Walmart Inc. ("Walmart"), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, the close of fact discovery is January 10, 2020; and WHEREAS, pending before the Court are plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery Resp
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON CERTAIN ISSUES RAISED IN PENDING MOTIONS TO COMPEL FROM DECEMBER 11, 2019 TO JANUARY 15, 2020

Plaintiffs Sharidan Stiles and Stiles 4 U, Inc. ("plaintiffs") and defendant Walmart Inc. ("Walmart"), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, the close of fact discovery is January 10, 2020; and

WHEREAS, pending before the Court are plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery Responses (ECF No. 279); Walmart's Motion to Compel Plaintiffs' Further Responses and Production in Response to Requests for Production (ECF No. 280); and Walmart's Motion to Compel Plaintiffs' Further Responses to Interrogatories (ECF No. 281);

WHEREAS, hearing on the three aforementioned motions is scheduled for December 11, 2019, before the Honorable Dennis M. Cota;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that Walmart's motions to compel (ECF Nos. 280 and 281) may be mooted by forthcoming supplemental discovery responses and document productions by plaintiffs, and that plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 279) as it pertains to Walmart's responses to plaintiffs' interrogatories (the fifth and sixth bullet points in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279) may be mooted by Walmart's forthcoming supplemental interrogatory responses;

WHEREAS, the parties further agree that plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 279) as it pertains to Walmart's redactions applied to documents (the third bullet point in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279) has been mooted by Walmart's supplemental document production;

WHEREAS, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) permits the modification of a pretrial scheduling order for good cause;

WHEREAS, good cause exists to continue the hearing on Walmart's motions to compel (ECF Nos. 280 and 281) and plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 279) as it pertains to Walmart's responses to plaintiffs' interrogatories (the fifth and sixth bullet points in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279) to allow the parties time to resolve the disputes at issue therein without the need for Court intervention; and

WHEREAS, good cause exists to continue the deadline for fact discovery as it pertains to the discovery at issue in Walmart's motions to compel (ECF Nos. 280 and 281) and Walmart's responses to plaintiffs' interrogatories at issue in plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 279), so that the Court can hear and rule on the parties' disputes as to those issues if the parties do not resolve those disputes prior to the time of the hearing.

THEREFORE, THE PARTIES, BY AND THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE UNDERSIGNED COUNSEL, HEREBY STIPULATE, AND THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

Plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 279) as it pertains to Walmart's redactions applied to documents (the third bullet point in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279) is withdrawn and stricken, and hearing on that issue is VACATED;

The hearing on Walmart's motions to compel (ECF Nos. 280 and 281) and plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 279) as it pertains to Walmart's responses to plaintiffs' interrogatories (the fifth and sixth bullet points in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279) is hereby CONTINUED to January 15, 2020;

The hearing on plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 279) as it pertains to the following issues REMAINS set for December 11, 2019:

• Walmart's responses and production in response to plaintiffs' request for production nos. 4, 7-8, 10, 12-13, 15, 20-21, 25, 26, 30-31, and 44 (the first bullet point in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279); • Walmart's custodians and search terms (the second bullet point in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279); and • Walmart's responses to plaintiffs' request for production nos. 1-2, 4-16, 20-21, 25-31, 39-44, 49, and 55-56 (the fourth bullet point in plaintiffs' notice of motion, ECF No. 279). Respectfully submitted, Dated: December 6, 2019 WHITE & CASE LLP /s/ Bryan A. Merryman Bryan A. Merryman (SBN 134357) WHITE & CASE LLP 555 S. Flower Street, Suite 2700 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2433 Telephone: (213) 620-7700 Facsimile: (213) 452-2329 Email: bmerryman@whitecase.com Attorneys for Defendant Walmart Inc. Dated: December 6, 2019 PIERCE BAINBRIDGE BECK PRICE & HECHT LLP /s/ Brian J. Dunne Brian J. Dunne (SBN 275689) (as authorized on December 6, 2019) PIERCE BAINBRIDGE BECK PRICE & HECHT LLP 355 S. Grand Avenue, 44th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 262-9333 Facsimile: (213) 279-2008 Email: bdunne@piercebainbridge.com DHILLON LAW GROUP Harmeet K. Dhillon DHILLON LAW GROUP 177 Post Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 433-1700 Facscimile: (415) 520-6593 Email: harmeet@dhillonlaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Sharidan L. Stiles and Stiles 4 U, Inc.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, 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