From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mlejnecky v. Olympus Imaging America, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION
Sep 2, 2011
NO. 2:10-CV-02630-JAM-KJN (E.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2011)

Opinion

NO. 2:10-CV-02630-JAM-KJN

09-02-2011

STEFANIE MLEJNECKY; GREG CLAYTOR, Plaintiffs, v. OLYMPUS IMAGING AMERICA INC., Defendant.

TERRELL MARSHALL DAUDT & WILLIE PLLC DLA PIPER LLP (US) By: Beth E. Terrell, CSB #178181 Marc C. Cote, Admitted Pro Hac Vice Michael F. Ram, CSB #104805 Karl Olson, CSB #104760 RAM, OLSON, CEREGHINO & KOPCZYNSKI By: Christopher M. Young, CSB #163319 Ryan T. Hansen, CSB #234329 Amanda Fitzsimmons, CSB #258888 Attorneys for Defendant Olympus Imaging America Inc. Marc Edelson, Admitted Pro Hac Vice EDELSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class


Michael F. Ram, CSB #104805

Karl Olson, CSB #104760

RAM, OLSON, CEREGHINO & KOPCZYNSKI

[Additional Counsel Appear on Signature Page]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

STIPULATION AND ORDER

GRANTING EXTENSION OF CLASS

CERTIFICATION FILING

DEADLINE

Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez

WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on September 28, 2010;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs propounded their first discovery requests to Defendant on December 7, 2010;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs propounded their second discovery requests to Defendant on June 30, 2011;

WHEREAS Olympus has filed two motions to dismiss and has not yet answered the Second Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS the parties have engaged in a significant number of meet and confer sessions regarding Plaintiffs' discovery requests and have submitted two discovery disputes to the Court;

WHEREAS a substantial percentage of the documents and information responsive to Plaintiffs' discovery requests is in the form of electronically stored information ("ESI"), including email and other types of electronic documents;

WHEREAS the parties have been working cooperatively to identify custodians and draft search terms to collect and produce Olympus' ESI;

WHEREAS despite the parties' cooperative efforts, no ESI has been produced to date and early searches have identified over 250,000 potentially responsive documents;

WHEREAS the parties are currently working to refine the search terms, if possible, to reduce the amount of data collected;

WHEREAS the parties agree that additional time is needed for Olympus to produce the information Plaintiffs seek for class certification and for Plaintiffs to review that information;

WHEREAS the following deadlines are currently set pursuant to the Court's case schedule: September 7, 2011 — Plaintiffs file their motion for class certification; November 9, 2011 — Defendants file their response to Plaintiffs' motion; November 23, 2011 — Plaintiffs file their reply in support of their motion.

WHEREAS the parties have not previously requested an extension of the briefing deadlines on Plaintiffs' motion for class certification;

WHEREAS the parties are working to avoid further continuances and do not currently foresee any need for additional time.

Therefore the parties agree and stipulate to extend the class certification briefing by a period of sixty days as follows:

I. STIPULATION

The parties agree that good cause exists to continue the briefing deadlines on Plaintiffs' motion for class certification as follows:

• November 7, 2011 — Plaintiffs file their motion for class certification;
• January 17, 2012 — Defendants file their response to Plaintiffs' motion; and
• February 7, 2012 — Plaintiffs file their reply in support of their motion.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED AND DATED this 2nd day of September, 2011.

TERRELL MARSHALL DAUDT

& WILLIE PLLC

DLA PIPER LLP (US)

By: Beth E. Terrell, CSB #178181

Marc C. Cote, Admitted Pro Hac Vice

Michael F. Ram, CSB #104805

Karl Olson, CSB #104760

RAM, OLSON, CEREGHINO

& KOPCZYNSKI

By: Christopher M. Young, CSB #163319

Ryan T. Hansen, CSB #234329

Amanda Fitzsimmons, CSB #258888

Attorneys for Defendant Olympus Imaging

America Inc.

Marc Edelson, Admitted Pro Hac Vice

EDELSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed

Class

II. ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

John A. Mendez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Beth E. Terrell, hereby certify that on September 2, 2011, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:

Christopher M. Young (Bar No. 163319)

Ryan T. Hansen (Bar No. 234329)

Amanda C. Fitzsimmons (Bar No. 258888)

DLA PIPER LLP (US)

Attorneys for Defendant

TERRELL MARSHALL DAUDT & WILLIE PLLC

By: Beth E. Terrell, CSB #178181

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class


Summaries of

Mlejnecky v. Olympus Imaging America, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION
Sep 2, 2011
NO. 2:10-CV-02630-JAM-KJN (E.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2011)
Case details for

Mlejnecky v. Olympus Imaging America, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:STEFANIE MLEJNECKY; GREG CLAYTOR, Plaintiffs, v. OLYMPUS IMAGING AMERICA…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION

Date published: Sep 2, 2011

Citations

NO. 2:10-CV-02630-JAM-KJN (E.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2011)