Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Harbers v. Eddie Bauer LLC, 2:19-cv-00968-JLR. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20191011b91 Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 01, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 01, 2019
Summary: STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESOLVING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY (DKT. 26) JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . STIPULATION WHEREAS, on July 23, 2019, this Court entered a Rule 16(b) And Rule 23(d)(2) Scheduling Order Regarding Class Certification Motion (Dkt. 19) which, among other things, set a deadline for Plaintiff Jennifer Harbers to complete discovery on class certification on or by November 18, 2019, and set a deadline for Plaintiff Harbers to file a motion f
More

STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESOLVING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY (DKT. 26)

STIPULATION

WHEREAS, on July 23, 2019, this Court entered a Rule 16(b) And Rule 23(d)(2) Scheduling Order Regarding Class Certification Motion (Dkt. 19) which, among other things, set a deadline for Plaintiff Jennifer Harbers to complete discovery on class certification on or by November 18, 2019, and set a deadline for Plaintiff Harbers to file a motion for class certification on or by December 18, 2019;

WHEREAS, on July 4, 2019, Plaintiff Harbers filed a Motion To Remand this action back to the King County Superior Court (Dkt. 13), a motion which has been fully briefed by the parties and which is pending;

WHEREAS, the Plaintiff's Motion To Remand argues that this federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims because Plaintiff's operative First Amended Complaint does not allege a sufficiently concrete injury-in-fact to confer Article III standing;

WHEREAS, on June 28, 2019, Defendant Eddie Bauer, LLC ("Eddie Bauer") filed its Motion To Dismiss First Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim (Dkt. 11), with further briefing being suspended by stipulated order (Dkt. 15) until after the disposition of Plaintiff's Motion To Remand;

WHEREAS, on September 16, 2019, Eddie Bauer filed and served its Motion To Stay Discovery (Dkt. 26), which asks the Court to stay discovery until the ruling upon Plaintiff's Motion To Remand on the grounds that district courts within the Ninth Circuit have held that a stay of discovery is appropriate while a plaintiff is challenging the Court's jurisdiction (Motion To Stay Discovery, Dkt. 26, pp. 3:5-4:9);

WHEREAS, after a review of the legal authorities cited by Eddie Bauer, Plaintiff Harbers concludes that she does not have an objection to a limited stay of all discovery and that it would not be a good use of judicial resources for this Court to adjudicate Eddie Bauer's Motion To Stay Discovery (Dkt. 26)—provided that Plaintiff's deadlines to complete class certification discovery and to file a motion for class certification are continued for a period of time equal to the period of the discovery stay;

NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff Jennifer Harbers ("Harbers") and Defendant Eddie Bauer, LLC ("Eddie Bauer") hereby STIPULATE and AGREE as follows:

1. All discovery in this civil action should be suspended from the day of the Court's granting of this Stipulated Motion to and through the day of the Court's entry of the later of an order adjudicating Plaintiff's Motion To Remand (Dkt. 13) or an order adjudicating Defendant's Motion To Dismiss (Dkt. 11) (the "Period of Stay"), with this stay of discovery being lifted upon this Court's entry of the later of an order adjudicating Plaintiff's Motion To Remand (Dkt. 13) or an order adjudicating Defendant's Motion To Dismiss (Dkt. 11).

2. The deadlines of November 18, 2019 (to complete class certification discovery), and December 18, 2019 (to file a motion for class certification), as stated in the Rule 16(b) And Rule 23(d)(2) Scheduling Order Regarding Class Certification Motion (Dkt. 19), should be amended and continued by the number of calendar days in the Period of Stay.

3. The Court should vacate the noting date for Eddie Bauer's Motion To Stay Discovery (Dkt. 26) is DENIED as moot.

DATE: September 23, 2019 Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted, SEED IP Law Group LLP HATTIS & LUKACS by: /s/ Marc C. Levy by: /s/ Daniel M. Hattis Marc C. Levy, WSBA No. 19203 Daniel M. Hattis, WSBA 50428 Thomas A. Shewmake, WSBA No. 50765 Paul Karl Lukacs (admitted pro hac vice) 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400 Che Corrington, WSBA No. 54241 Seattle, WA 98104 400 108th Avenue NE, Suite 500 Telephone: 206-622-4900 Bellevue, WA 98004 Facsimile: 206-682-6031 Telephone: 425-233-8628 marcl@seedip.com Facsimile: 425-412-7171 tomshewmake@seedip.com che@hattislaw.com dan@hattislaw.com STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP pkl@hattislaw.com Stephanie A. Sheridan (admitted pro hac vice) Anthony J. Anscombe (admitted pro hac vice) Attorney for Meegan B. Brooks (admitted pro hac vice) Plaintiff Jennifer Harbers One Market Street and the Proposed Class Steuart Tower, Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 415-365-6700 Facsimile: 415-365-6699 ssheridan@steptoe.com aanscombe@steptoe.com mbrooks@steptoe.com Attorneys for Defendant Eddie Bauer, LLC

ORDER

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