Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Todd v. Tempur Sealy International, Inc., 3:13-cv-04984-JST (MEJ). (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150610b37 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 08, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 08, 2015
Summary: Stipulation and Order to Modify the December 15, 2014 Scheduling Order JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . Pursuant to Local Rules 6 and 7, Plaintiffs and Defendants Tempur-Sealy International, Inc. and Tempur-pedic North America, LLC (collectively, "Defendants", and, together with Plaintiffs, the "Parties"), hereby stipulate and agree to the following modification of the December 15, 2014 Scheduling Order: I. BACKGROUND 1. Plaintiffs filed the original Complaint on October 25, 2013. Plaintif
More

Stipulation and Order to Modify the December 15, 2014 Scheduling Order

Pursuant to Local Rules 6 and 7, Plaintiffs and Defendants Tempur-Sealy International, Inc. and Tempur-pedic North America, LLC (collectively, "Defendants", and, together with Plaintiffs, the "Parties"), hereby stipulate and agree to the following modification of the December 15, 2014 Scheduling Order:

I. BACKGROUND

1. Plaintiffs filed the original Complaint on October 25, 2013. Plaintiffs filed the First Amended Complaint on November 7, 2013 and the Second Amended Complaint on August 29, 2014. (Doc. 63). Adams Dec. ¶ 3.

2. On October 17 and December 15, 2014, the Parties filed a Joint Motion and Stipulation to Modify the Scheduling Order, and pursuant thereto, the Parties stipulated and agreed to certain modified deadlines.

3. Document production from third parties is more voluminous than anticipated. Both parties recognize that their expert witnesses need additional time to review and analyze third party produced documents before the class certification motion, expert declaration and/or reports, and expert depositions occur. Adams Dec. ¶ 4.

4. Both parties agree to extend certain deadlines contained in the December 15, 2014 Scheduling Order, for a period of up to thirty (30) days. Adams Dec. ¶ 8.

5. Counsel for the Plaintiffs and Defendants have stipulated and agreed, subject to the Court's approval, of the following modified deadlines that will, at most, extend the current outstanding deadlines by a period of thirty (30) days, but in the event that counsel for the Plaintiffs does not need the full thirty (30) days, would largely keep this matter on the current schedule set by this Court.

6. The modification of the December 15, 2014 Scheduling Order will benefit all Parties because it will enable the Parties and their experts to thoroughly develop and complete the underlying discovery necessary to prepare and respond to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification. Adams Dec. ¶ 6.

7. This is the third request for modification of the Scheduling Order. Adams Dec. ¶ 7.

II. STIPULATION

8. The Parties stipulate and agree to, and request the Court order the following modified deadlines:

Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline Deadline to file motion for class June 16, 2015 July 16, 2015 certification Deadline for Defendants to July 10, 2015 (or 24 days August 9, 2015 identify expert witnesses and from filing the motion provide proposed deposition dates for class certification, whichever is sooner) Depositions of Plaintiffs' expert June 18, 2015-July 20, July 18, 2015-August witnesses re: class certification 2015 (or 2-34 days from 20, 2015 filing the motion for class certification, whichever is sooner) Deadline to file opposition to August 6, 2015 (or 52 September 3, 2015 motion for class certification days from the filing of the motion for class certification, whichever is sooner) Depositions of Defendants' expert August 15, 2015- September 14, 2015- witnesses re: class certification September 9, 2015 (or September 30, 2015 60-85 days from filing the motion for class certification, whichever is sooner) Deadline to file reply in support of October 13, 2015 (or 119 October 23, 2015 motion for class certification days from filing the motion for class certification, whichever is sooner) Class certification hearing November 2, 2015 November 19, 2015

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, 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