Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

CANCILLA v. ECOLAB, INC., 3:12-cv-03001-CRB. (2012)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20121228884 Visitors: 21
Filed: Dec. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Dec. 06, 2012
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DATES RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION AND SETTING HEARING CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge. This Stipulation is entered into by and between Plaintiff NICK CANCILLA ("Plaintiff") and Defendant ECOLAB INC. ("Ecolab" or "Defendant") by and through their undersigned counsel. Plaintiff and Defendant are collectively referred to herein as the "Parties." RECITALS WHEREAS, on June 11, 2012, Plaintiff filed an action in the United States District
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DATES RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION AND SETTING HEARING

CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.

This Stipulation is entered into by and between Plaintiff NICK CANCILLA ("Plaintiff") and Defendant ECOLAB INC. ("Ecolab" or "Defendant") by and through their undersigned counsel. Plaintiff and Defendant are collectively referred to herein as the "Parties."

RECITALS

WHEREAS, on June 11, 2012, Plaintiff filed an action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California styled Cancilla v. Ecolab, Inc., Case No. CV 12 3001 CRB;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff claims, among other things, that Ecolab has misclassified Plaintiff as exempt from overtime requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and, as a result, has not provided overtime compensation for overtime hours worked ("FLSA Claims");

WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed that before Plaintiff moves to certify the above-referenced collective actions, the parties will explore the issue of whether Defendant's FLSA Section 7(i) affirmative defense is appropriate for summary judgment/adjudication;

WHEREAS, in order to facilitate the Parties' determination as to whether Defendant's FLSA Section 7(i) affirmative defense is appropriate for summary judgment/adjudication, and in order to facilitate any such motions, the Parties have also agreed to prioritize discovery related to the FLSA Section 7(i) exemption and are currently conducting written discovery and depositions of Defendant;

WHEREAS, the Parties are presently engaged in meet and confer efforts regarding written discovery and have encountered scheduling conflicts in conducting depositions of Defendant that impact the filing date set for their cross-motions for summary judgment, currently ordered to be January 15, 2013 (see Docket No. 32);

THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate and agree as follows:

STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT

1. The Parties hereby stipulate and request the Court to order that the following dates apply to the Parties' cross-motions for summary judgment/adjudication:

Parties to File Cross-Motions For Summary February 11, 2013 Judgment Parties to File Oppositions to Cross-Motions March 4, 2013 for Summary Judgment Parties to File Replies to Cross-Motions for March 18, 2013 Summary Judgment Hearing Date Friday March 29, 2013 at 10:00 a.m.

2. The Parties further stipulate that all dates referenced in the Stipulation and Order Regarding Tolling of FLSA Statute of Limitations and filing of the Motion for Conditional Collective Action Certification are extended consistent with the schedule listed above. (See Docket No. 35.)

ORDER

The foregoing Stipulation is approved, and 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