Opinion
Case No.: 3:10-cv-00488-EMC
10-18-2011
JOSEPH ROLING and ALEXANDER LANDVATER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. E*TRADE SECURITIES LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants.
JOSEPH ROLING and ALEXANDER LANDVATER, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, Rafey S. Balabanian One of Plaintiffs' attorneys Rafey S. Balabanian (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Edelson McGuire, LLC E*TRADE SECURITIES, LLC, Whitty Somvichian(194463) Cooley LLP Douglas P. Lobel (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Sean Reis (SBN 184044)
Edelson McGuire, LLP
Rafey S. Balabanian (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Steven L. Lezell (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Ari J. Scharg (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Edelson McGuire, LLC
The Honorable Edward M. Chen
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY
DEADLINES
AMENDED ORDER
Plaintiffs Joseph Roling and Alexander Landvater (collectively "Plaintiffs"), and Defendant E*TRADE Securities, LLC ("E*TRADE") (Plaintiffs and E*TRADE are collectively referred to as the "Parties"), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 and L.R. 7-12, hereby stipulate and agree to extend the class discovery deadline by sixty (60) days, and modify the Discovery Plan. (Dkt. No. 69.) In support of their Stipulation, the Parties state as follows:
1. Plaintiffs Joseph Roling and Alexander Landvater filed this putative class action lawsuit against E*Trade Securities LLC on February 3, 2010. (Dkt. No. 1.)
2. As set forth in the Revised Discovery Plan, which was approved by the Court on February 2, 2011, discovery in this matter has been bifurcated into class and merits phases, with class discovery closing on November 1, 2011. (Dkt. No. 69.)
3. Good cause exists to extend the class discovery period by sixty (60) days. This case concerns a putative class that is potentially comprised of millions customers. As such, the Parties have exchanged thousands of documents relating to customer contracts and agreements dating back to 2001, and are still in the process of producing relevant documents. Additionally, several depositions still need to be taken, and Plaintiffs just received on Friday, October 14, firm dates for certain Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses of E*Trade.
4. Extending the discovery cut-off date by sixty (60) days will allow the Parties to finish taking depositions, and also to issue any follow up discovery that may be necessary after the depositions have been taken.
5. The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation." Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002). The court may modify the discovery deadline only for good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Zivkovic, 302 F.3d at 1087. Good cause to extend a deadline exists when the deadline "cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension." Fed. R. Civ. P 16 Advisory Comm. Notes (1983 Am.); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992).
6. The Parties have been diligently engaged in discovery in this matter, and the requested extension will not prejudice either party. The Parties do not anticipate any future extensions or modification of the Discovery Plan currently in place.
7. This Stipulation, and the requested extension sought herein, is not brought for the purposes of delay.
NOW THEREFORE, the Parties hereby, STIPULATE and AGREE, subject to Court approval, that the Court extend the class discovery deadline by sixty (60) days, and modify the Discovery Plan as follows:
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦a. First Phase Discovery Cutoff: ¦January 3, 2012 ¦ +------------------------------------+----------------------------------------¦ ¦b. Plaintiffs' Supplemental Motion ¦10 ¦ ¦for Class Certification: ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦February 1-Tf 2012 ¦ +------------------------------------+----------------------------------------¦ ¦c. Defendant's Opposition to ¦23 ¦ ¦Plaintiffs' Motion for Class ¦ ¦ ¦Certification: ¦March 30, 2012 ¦ +------------------------------------+----------------------------------------¦ ¦d. Plaintiffs' Reply In Support of ¦13 ¦ ¦their Motion for Class ¦ ¦ ¦Certification: ¦April 20, 2012 ¦ +------------------------------------+----------------------------------------¦ ¦e. Hearing on the Motion for Class ¦May 4, 2012 ¦ ¦Certification: ¦ ¦ +------------------------------------+----------------------------------------¦ ¦ ¦August 7, 2012 or 3 months following ¦ ¦f. Second Phase Discovery Cutoff: ¦ruling on Class Cert., whichever is ¦ ¦ ¦later ¦ +------------------------------------+----------------------------------------¦ ¦ ¦October 8, 2012 or 60 days following ¦ ¦g. Deadline for Dispositive Motions:¦close of merits discovery, whichever is ¦ ¦ ¦later ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Respectfully submitted,
JOSEPH ROLING and ALEXANDER
LANDVATER, individually and on behalf
of a class of similarly situated individuals,
Rafey S. Balabanian
One of Plaintiffs' attorneys
Rafey S. Balabanian (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Edelson McGuire, LLC
E*TRADE SECURITIES, LLC,
Whitty Somvichian(194463)
Cooley LLP
Douglas P. Lobel (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Rafey S. Balabanian, an attorney, certify that, on October 18, 2011, I caused the above and foregoing Stipulation to Extend Discovery Deadlines, to be filed with the Clerk of the Court and transmitted by electronic mail to all counsel of record via the Court's CM/ECF electronic filing system, on this the 18th day of October, 2011.
/s/ Rafey S. Balabanian