Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Christina Mitchell, et al v. Skyline Homes

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


November 30, 2011

CHRISTINA MITCHELL, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
SKYLINE HOMES, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Defendant has noticed for hearing on December 14, 2011 a renewed motion for leave to file third party complaint, a motion to compel plaintiffs' attendance at deposition, a motion to compel further responses to discovery, and a motion to continue class certification deadlines. Upon review of the notices of motion, and the briefing in support and opposition of the renewed motion for leave to file third party complaint and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The hearing date of December 14, 2011 on defendant's motions is vacated.

2. The court previously denied defendant's motion to implead without prejudice to its renewal after resolution of the motion for class certification. (Dkt. no. 142). That order stands. Defendant's renewed motion (dkt. no. 162) is accordingly denied without prejudice.*fn1

3. No later than December 7, 2011, the parties shall file a joint letter brief on the issues raised in defendant's motions (dkt. nos. 164, 165) as provided under paragraph 5 of the order filed September 29, 2011 (dkt. no. 142). A separate letter brief shall be filed for each motion. With respect to the letter brief on defendant's motion to compel further responses to interrogatories, the brief shall not exceed eight pages. Defendant may submit as an exhibit a copy of the disputed discovery requests and responses. The motions shall thereafter stand submitted.

4. This action was removed from state court on August 12, 2009. By order filed October 24, 2010, discovery pertaining to class issues was to be completed by May 4, 2011 and the motion for class certification was to be filed no later than July 13, 2011. (Dkt. no. 69.) By order filed April 18, 2011, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, those dates were continued to August 2, 2011 and October 11, 2011, respectively. (Dkt. no. 87.) The dates were again continued, by stipulation of the parties and order of the court, to October 11, 2011 and December 20, 2011. (Dkt. no. 113.) This matter has been pending over two years in federal court. Upon review of the docket and the voluminous pleadings and documents that have been submitted in this matter, the court finds further extension of the time for filing the motion for class certification is not warranted. Accordingly, the motion to extend the time for filing plaintiffs' opening brief (dkt. no. 166) is denied. However, the court has not previously set a briefing schedule for the motion and will do so now.

a. Plaintiffs' motion for class certification shall be filed no later than December 20, 2011.

b. Defendant's opposition shall be filed no later than March 30, 2012. During this time period, defendant may conduct discovery on issues raised in plaintiffs' motion, including depositions of any experts disclosed in plaintiffs' briefing.

c. Plaintiffs' reply, if any, shall be filed no later than April 20, 2012.

d. The matter will thereafter stand submitted. The court will set a hearing on the motion for class certification as necessary.

4 mitchell11.cuo.sub


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.