From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Snyder v. Does

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Sep 10, 2021
4:20-cv-08419-KAW (N.D. Cal. Sep. 10, 2021)

Opinion

4:20-cv-08419-KAW

09-10-2021

LARRY SNYDER, and on behalf of all unnamed Plaintiffs similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. DOES 1 THROUGH 50, Inclusive, identified as MONSANTO COMPANY, PBI-GORDON CORPORATION, and THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, Defendants.

GOMEZ LAW GROUP Alvin M. Gomez Frank Zeccola ATTORNEYS FOR LARRY SNYDER, and on behalf of all unnamed Plaintiffs similarly situated. HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP Bruce J. Zabarauskas Jonathan B. Shoebotham SHOOK HARDY & BACON Diana A. Chang ATTORNEYS FOR SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT MONSANTO COMPANY (sued herein as DOE 1). GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP Matthew P. Nugent P. Gerhardt Zacher Thomas J. Tobin ATTORNEYS FOR SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT PBI-GORDON CORPORATION (sued herein as DOE 4) LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP Pamela M. Ferguson ATTORNEYS FOR SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY (sued herein as DOE 2).


GOMEZ LAW GROUP Alvin M. Gomez Frank Zeccola ATTORNEYS FOR LARRY SNYDER, and on behalf of all unnamed Plaintiffs similarly situated.

HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP Bruce J. Zabarauskas Jonathan B. Shoebotham SHOOK HARDY & BACON Diana A. Chang ATTORNEYS FOR SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT MONSANTO COMPANY (sued herein as DOE 1).

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-4, a complete list of parties represented is contained on the signature pages of this Stipulation.

GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP Matthew P. Nugent P. Gerhardt Zacher Thomas J. Tobin ATTORNEYS FOR SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT PBI-GORDON CORPORATION (sued herein as DOE 4)

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP Pamela M. Ferguson ATTORNEYS FOR SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY (sued herein as DOE 2).

STIPULATION AND ORDER FURTHER MODIFYING DEADLINES and CONTINUING INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE (AS MODIFIED)

Kandis A. Westmore United States Magistrate Judge.

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, Plaintiff LARRY SNYDER (“Plaintiff'), and Specially Appearing Defendants MONSANTO COMPANY, PBI-GORDON CORPORATION, and THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY (“Defendants”), as and for their Stipulation to Modify Deadlines and Continue Initial Case Management Conference, respectfully state the following:

1. On November 30, 2020, the Defendants removed this action from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Alameda. [Dkt. No. 1].
2. On January 19, 2021, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). [Dkt. No. 19.]
3. On February 18, 2021, each of the Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss. Defendant Monsanto Company filed its Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a), 9(b), 12(b)(2), and 12(b)(6), and Alternatively Motion to Strike [Dkt. No. 28]. Defendant PBI-Gordon Corporation filed its Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a), 9(b), 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6) and Alternatively, Motion to Strike [Dkt. No. 30]. Defendant The Dow Chemical Company filed its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint Pursuant to F.R.C.P. Rules 8, 9, 12(B)(2) & (6), 12(f), 12(c)(1)(A) & 23(d0(1)(D) [Dkt. No. 31].
4. On February 18, 2021, the parties received Notice that the Initial Case Management Conference was rescheduled to July 27, 2021, with the Case Management Statement due by July 20, 2021. [Dkt. 29].
5. On June 11, 2021, the parties received Notice vacating the hearings set for June 17, 2021, on said Motions to Dismiss. The parties were further notified that said Motions to Dismiss will be decided on the papers. [Dkt. No. 45].
6. On July 13, 2021, defendant Monsanto Company filed an Uncontested Administrative Motion To Modify Deadlines and Continue Case Management Conference [Dkt. No. 46] (the “Initial Administrative Motion”), and a Stipulation and Order Modifying Deadlines And Continuing Initial Case Management Conference [Dkt. No. 47], requesting that the Court extend the deadlines for exchanging Initial Disclosures, the filing of a Case Management Statement and the date of the Initial Case Management Conference until at least thirty (30) days after the Court has ruled on the Motions to Dismiss.
7. On July 15, 2021, the Court enter an order granting the Initial Administrative Motion, which extended the deadline to file a Joint Case Management Statement to September 21, 2021, and continued the Initial Case Management Conference to September 28, 2021. [Dkt. No. 48].
8. The Motions to Dismiss remain sub judice before the Court.
9. In light of the pending Motions to Dismiss, the parties hereby stipulate, subject to Court approval of this stipulation, to a further continuation of the deadlines for the exchange of Initial Disclosures and the Case Management Statement until thirty (30) days after the Court rules on Defendants' pending Motions to Dismiss. The parties further jointly request that the Initial Case Management Conference be continued to a time at least 30 days after the Court rules on the pending Motions to Dismiss.
10. Continuing the deadline to file a Case Management Statement and the Initial Case Management Conference until at least 30 days after the Court has ruled on the pending Motions to Dismiss would permit the parties sufficient time to exchange Initial Disclosures and to prepare the Case Management Statement in advance of the Initial Case Management Conference. This requested continuance would serve the interest ofjudicial economy, conserve the Court's and the parties' resources, and allow for a more efficient and productive discussion with the Court during the Initial Case Management Conference given the procedural posture of this case. Specifically, considerable resources and litigation costs incurred in preparing the Case Management Statement and in preparing for the Case Management Conference and related deadlines will be avoided if the Court grants the pending Motions to Dismiss.
11. All parties to this action have conferred and consent to this Stipulation, the relief requested herein, and the following proposed order.

NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendants hereby stipulate to, and request that the Court enter, an order further extending the deadlines for the exchange of Initial Disclosures, and filing of a Case Management Statement to January 25, 2022, and continuing the Initial Case Management Conference to February 1, 2022 at 1:30 p.m.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED AS MODIFIED.


Summaries of

Snyder v. Does

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Sep 10, 2021
4:20-cv-08419-KAW (N.D. Cal. Sep. 10, 2021)
Case details for

Snyder v. Does

Case Details

Full title:LARRY SNYDER, and on behalf of all unnamed Plaintiffs similarly situated…

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Sep 10, 2021

Citations

4:20-cv-08419-KAW (N.D. Cal. Sep. 10, 2021)