JAMES S. GWIN, District Judge.
In this purported class action lawsuit, Plaintiffs are retirees of Defendant Moen, Inc, a widow of a Moen retiree, and the United Automobile Workers ("UAW"). Plaintiffs say that Defendant Moen plans to cancel Moen retiree healthcare coverage that was promised in a series of collective bargaining agreements.
On December 11, 2013, this Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. With its motion, the Plaintiffs sought to prevent Defendant Moen from terminating the healthcare coverage and a case management conference. The Court subsequently granted Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and set a bond of $5,000 for the injunction.
Before the Court are Plaintiffs' motion to extend all deadlines in this case by 60 days and Defendant's motion to increase the amount of the bond.
The Court
On December 11, 2013, the Court set a variety of deadlines for this case: 1) all discovery needed to file or respond to a dispositive motion must be completed by March 17, 2014; 2) all dispositive motions must be filed by March 24, 2014, with responses due April 7, 2014, and replies due April 14, 2014; 3) all discovery must be completed by May 29, 2014; 4) trial will begin on June 9, 2014, with a final pre-trial conference June 4, 2014, at noon.
On March 3, 2014, Plaintiffs' moved for a 60-day extension of all deadlines in the case.
Defendants oppose a 60-day extension but would agree to a 30-day extension of all deadlines.
The Court will allow a brief extension of the dates in this case but will not allow a 60-day extension.
First, the primary evidence on Plaintiffs' claims are the contracts themselves.
Second, the Court has preliminarily enjoined Defendant Moen from terminating the purported class's healthcare coverage.
Therefore, the Court will reset the deadlines in this case as follows:
1) all discovery needed to file or respond to a dispositive motion must be completed by April 17, 2014;
2) all dispositive motions must be filed by April 24, 2014, with responses due May 8, 2014, and replies due May 15, 2014;
3) all discovery must be completed by June 27, 2014;
4) trial is set on a two-week standby period beginning July 7, 2014, with a final pre-trial conference July 2, 2014, at noon.
On December 11, 2013, at the hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, the Court announced that it would grant the motion and set a bond of $5,000.
On December 17, 2013, the Court issued a written order granting the motion and setting a bond of $5,000.
Almost two months later, on February 10, 2014, Defendant Moen moved the Court to increase the amount of the bond.
Plaintiffs oppose the motion.
Although the Sixth Circuit has not specifically said that a wrongfully enjoined defendant's damages are capped at the amount of the bond,
The Court will not increase the bond.
First, Moen did not object to the $5,000 bond for two months. Moen knew that the Court would likely set a $5,000 bond on December 11, 2013. It also had all of the financial information to calculate what its actual loss would be from a wrongful injunction. Nevertheless, Moen did not make this motion until February 10, 2014. The Court finds that this delay suggests that the importance of the bond to Moen is not so great.
But second, and most importantly, the Court rejects Moen's argument that the UAW should contribute to the bond.
The parties who are the beneficiaries of the injunction are the retirees, and the Court has already determined that they are on fixed incomes and could not pay the costs of healthcare coverage in the absence of an injunction.
For these reasons, the Court
IT IS SO ORDERED.