STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINES

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, Chief District Judge.

The parties respectfully request a six-month extension of the deadlines in this case. The parties have worked diligently and amicably to resolve numerous issues regarding the scope of discovery, production of electronically stored information, and the terms of the Stipulated Protective Order. Having resolved these disputes, the parties agree that a six-month extension of the deadlines in this matter is needed to complete class discovery, prepare for expert disclosure and class certification briefing, and coordinate discovery with related litigation pending in the Northern District of California.

I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND

On July 16, 2017, the Court adopted the case schedule the parties proposed in their Joint Status Report. Dkt. No. 47. The Court's Scheduling Order set deadlines for class certification briefing and expert disclosure and depositions, beginning with a May 25, 2018, deadline for Plaintiffs to file a motion for class certification and serve expert disclosures and reports. Id.

This proposed class action involves allegations that panoramic sunroofs installed in seven models of Nissan vehicles suffer from a uniform defect. The parties sought to streamline and reduce the cost of discovery and engaged in extensive negotiations concerning the scope of discovery, search terms and search-term proximity for production of electronically stored information ("ESI"), and the terms of the Stipulated Protective Order and Order Regarding Discovery of ESI. The parties met and conferred on numerous occasions over the course of several months and were able to narrow their disputes to a single issue: whether Defendant Nissan North America, Inc. ("NNA") could redact certain unprivileged information prior to production.

On January 19, 2018, the parties filed their Proposed Stipulated Protective Order, Dkt. No. 52, and Stipulation and Proposed Order regarding the Discovery of ESI, Dkt. No. 53, carving out the issue of redaction for court resolution. On January 23, 2018, the parties jointly requested an expedited resolution of the remaining dispute concerning pre-production redaction. The Court ruled on the issue during a telephonic hearing conducted on February 1, 2018. Dkt No. 59.

With the deadlines for class certification quickly approaching, significant discovery remains to be completed despite the parties' cooperation and diligence. To date, the parties have exchanged and responded to written discovery, Plaintiffs have produced documents, and NNA is positioned to begin a rolling production of its documents based on the agreed-upon search terms for electronically-stored information. Third-party discovery also is underway. In addition, the parties are also coordinating discovery in this action with a companion case filed in the Northern District of California, Sherida Johnson et. al. v. Nissan N. Am., Inc., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-00517 (N.D. Cal. Filed Feb. 1, 2017). The parties have agreed that Nissan's foreign parent, Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. (which is not served in the underlying case) will produce its documents once in the Johnson case and then those documents — subject to appropriate protection, including compliance with the terms of the Protective Order in the Johnson case — may be used in this case (despite the non-service of NML in this case). Of note, the Johnson case recently was impacted by the transfer of a related case from the Eastern District of California (Horne). The Johnson-Horne plaintiffs will file their consolidated third-amended complaint on March 16, 2018, to which NNA will respond on April 6, 2018. These events in Johnson have delayed the start of discovery, which in turn impacts the sharing of documents from that case in this case.

The parties will continue to work diligently and cooperatively to complete document discovery, schedule depositions, and resolve any disputes that may arise promptly and without court intervention. A six-month extension of the deadlines in this matter would facilitate the coordination of discovery by more closely aligning the case schedule with Johnson. For these reasons, the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows.

II. STIPULATION

Whereas, significant discovery is still required for the parties to address class certification, and given the parties' desire to coordinate discovery with Johnson, the parties respectfully request that the Court extend the deadlines in this matter as set forth below:

III. ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.