Opinion
MARLIN & SALTZMAN, Stanley D Saltzman, Esq., Louis M. Marlin, Esq., Marcus J. Bradley, Esq., Christina A. Humphrey, Esq., Agoura Hills, California, HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Steve W. Berman, Esq., Lee M. Gordon, Esq., Pasadena, California, Paul T. Cullen, Esq., THE CULLEN LAW FIRM, APC, Agoura Hills, California, Peter M. Hart, Esq., LAW OFFICES OF PETER M. HART, Los Angeles, California, Kenneth H. Yoon, Esq., LAW OFFICES OF KENNETH H. YOON, Los Angeles, California, Eric Honig, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF ERIC HONIG, Marina del Rey, California, Steve W. Berman, Esq., HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Seattle, Washington, William Rehwald, Esq., Lawrence Glasner, Esq., Daniel Chaleff, Esq., REHWALD GLASNER & CHALEFF, Woodland Hills, California, Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Putative Class.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP, Matthew C. Kane, Esq., Michael D. Mandel, Esq., Sabrina A. Beldner, Esq., John A. Van Hook, Esq., Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Defendant SCHNEIDER NATIONAL CARRIERS, INC.
JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER DATES AND DEADLINES IN FURTHERANCE OF CONTINUED APRIL15, 2015 MEDIATION; PROPOSED ORDER
JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge.
Plaintiffs and Defendants hereby submit the following Joint Stipulation to Continue Case Management Conference Dates and Deadlines in Furtherance of Continued April 15, 2015 Mediation ("Stipulation"):
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2013, the Court entered its Order granting Defendant's Motion to Stay this action pending the appeals before the Ninth Circuit in Dilts v. Penske, 819 F.Supp.2d 1109 (S.D. Cal. 2011), and Campbell v. Vitran, 2012 WL 2317233 (C.D. Cal. June 8, 2012) (Dkt. #207).
WHEREAS, on July 21, 2014, after the Ninth Circuit's decisions in those cases were rendered, the Court entered an Order lifting the stay of this action (Dkt. #216).
WHEREAS, in connection the stay of this action being lifted, on September 26, 2014, the Court held a Case Management Conference ("CMC") to review the status of this case and set further dates and deadlines related thereto, for which the Parties filed a Joint CMC Statement with the Court on September 19, 2014 (Dkt. #227).
WHEREAS, after completion of the CMC, on October 3, 2014, the Court entered its Case Management Order Scheduling Trial and Pretrial Matters (the "CMO") (Dkt. #229), which set the following dates and deadlines for this case:
Deadline or Event Day Date Time Completion of Private Mediation Monday January 26, 2015 Last Day for Expert Discovery Monday August 3, 2015 Close of ALL Discovery Monday August 31, 2015 Last Day to Hear Dispositive Friday September 11, 2015 9:00 a.m. Motions Pretrial Conference Monday December 7, 2015 2:00 p.m. Jury Selection Wednesday January 6, 2016 8:00 a.m. Jury Trial Date Monday January 11, 2016 8:00 a.m.
WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the Parties agreed on the selection of David Rotman, Esq. in San Francisco for their mediator and scheduled such mediation to occur on Wednesday, January 21, 2015, and agreed that mailing of notice of the pendency of the action to the certified class members would be deferred until shortly after the completion of the mediation, in the hope that a successful mediation would obviate the need for notice to be sent other than for a preliminarily approved class action settlement.
WHEREAS, in preparation for the mediation, the parties conferred throughout November and December 2014 and through January 15, 2015, on the parameters for a data pull to be prepared by Defendant and shared with Plaintiffs for purposes of evaluating the potential exposure in the case prior to the mediation.
WHEREAS, due to the size of the certified classes and the almost decade-long class period involved, and significant changes in Defendant's personnel who were involved in a prior data pull provided by Defendant in discovery during the case back in 2011 (including one who passed away not long thereafter), as well as the fact that Defendant substituted in new defense counsel in this action in 2014 that was not involved in the prior data pull provided in that earlier discovery, Defendant encountered significant challenges in terms of systems data and capacity, personnel with institutional knowledge, and familiarity with prior data provided earlier in the case during discovery.
WHEREAS, as a result of the foregoing, Defendant was not able to provide an initial mediation data pull to Plaintiffs until January 5, 2015, but, unfortunately, Plaintiffs immediately identified issues with the potential integrity of the data provided, particularly when compared to the data previously provided by Defendant earlier in the case during discovery, which the Parties' counsel conferred about extensively during the week of January 5, 2015.
WHEREAS, as a result of the Parties' conferring about the January 5, 2015 mediation data pull provided by Defendant, a second mediation data pull was provided by Defendant to Plaintiffs on January 13, 2015, but, unfortunately, Plaintiffs again immediately identified issues with the potential integrity of the data provided, and again particularly when compared to the data previously provided by Defendant earlier in the case during discovery, which the Parties' counsel conferred about extensively during the days following that week.
WHEREAS, as a result of reviewing the issues raised by Plaintiffs about the mediation data pulls provided to them to date, on January 15, 2015, Defendant concluded that it would be impossible to reconcile the data issues identified by Plaintiffs sufficiently in advance of the January 21, 2015 scheduled mediation which was only four business days away because significant work and coordination with Plaintiffs would be required to understand and agree that both sides are evaluating the same reliable data set and are in mutual agreement as to what the data therein represents.
WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing, on January 15, 2015, Defendant notified Plaintiffs that proceeding with the mediation as scheduled on January 21, 2015 would not only not result in a resolution of the action, but would carry with it the probable risk of being counterproductive to achieving a resolution in the short term, an assessment which Plaintiffs shared at that point.
WHEREAS, in order to avoid the foregoing, Defendant requested that Plaintiffs agree to an approximately 60-day continuance of the mediation with Mr. Rotman and, subject to the court's approval, a comporting continuance of all dates and deadlines in the CMO, such that the Parties could focus their attention and efforts on reaching agreement on the sources and scope of, and preparing, a mediation data pull that both sides are comfortable with to prepare their assessments of the potential exposure in the case and have a productive mediation with Mr. Rotman.
WHEREAS, due to Mr. Rotman's reputation and demand to serve as a class action mediator, the first available date he had to continue the mediation which works for all Parties and their counsel is Wednesday, April 15, 2015, which the Parties have reserved, and, in order to facilitate the completion of that mediation as set forth above, the Parties are herein stipulating and requesting, for good cause as set forth above, that the CMO dates and deadlines be continued by the Court as set forth below.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND REQUESTED by the Parties herein, through their counsel of record, that the dates and deadlines in the CMO be continued to the new dates as set forth below, or such other dates as are more convenient for the Court, and that all other provisions of the CMO remain unchanged, including the procedures for bringing dispositive motions as directed by the Court at the September 26, 2014 CMC:
Deadline or Event Day Old Date New Date Time Completion of Private Monday January 26, 2015 April 20, 2015 Mediation Last Day for Expert Monday August 3, 2015 October 26, 2015 Discovery Close of ALL Discovery Monday August 31, 2015 November 23, 2015 Last Day to Hear Friday September 11, 2015 December 4, 2015 9:00 a.m. Dispositive Motions Pretrial Conference Monday December 7, 2015 February 29, 2016 2:00 p.m. Jury Selection Wednesday January 6, 2016 April 13, 2016 8:00 a.m. Jury Trial Date Monday January 11, 2016 April 20, 2016 8:00 a.m.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
(PROPOSED) ORDER
PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.