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.

Mui Ho, Shelda Anglin, and v. Toyota Motor Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 10, 2012

MUI HO, SHELDA ANGLIN, AND TED FLORY, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION, AND TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC.,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Conti N Samuel Senior U.S. District Court Judge

MICHAEL L. MALLOW (SBN 188745) mmallow@loeb.com DENISE A. SMITH-MARS (SBN 215057) dmars@loeb.com 3 DARLENE M. CHO (SBN 251167) dcho@loeb.com 4 LOEB & LOEB LLP 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 2200 5 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: 310.282.2000 6 Facsimile: 310.282.2200 7 Attorneys for Defendant TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., 8 INC.

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION ) COMPLAINT; FOR ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE; AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE AND RELATED DATES Complaint filed: May 24, 2012

Assigned to Hon. Samuel Conti

This stipulation is entered into by Toyota Motor Corporation ("TMC") and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. ("TMS") (collectively, "Toyota"), and Plaintiffs 3 Mui Ho, Shelda Anglin, and Ted Flory (collectively, "Plaintiffs") (collectively, the 4 "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel, with reference to the following 5 facts and recitals:

WHEREAS, on August 15, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Class 7 Action Complaint (the "FAC"), which, for the first time, named TMC as an 8 additional defendant in this action;

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court's Order dated July 30, 2012, the deadline for TMS to respond to the FAC is September 14, 2012 [Docket #20];

WHEREAS, as of the date of this Stipulation, TMC has not been served with 12 the Summons and FAC in this action;

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that their preference is to have TMS and TMC 14 jointly file any response to the FAC;

WHEREAS, the case management conference in this action is currently 16 scheduled for December 7, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.; and

WHEREAS, no trial date has been set.

NOW, THEREFORE:

1. It is stipulated that TMC will be deemed to be served as of the date this Stipulation is filed with the Court. Notwithstanding the date on which service on TMC is deemed to have been effected, TMC shall file a response to Plaintiffs' FAC pursuant to paragraph 2 below.

2. The Parties hereby stipulate and agree, subject to Court approval, that 24 TMC and TMS shall have until October 12, 2012 to file a response to Plaintiffs' 25 FAC. To the extent TMC and TMS' response is a motion, the Parties agree to the 26 following briefing schedule, pursuant to the Commentary to Local Rule 7-2, which 27 states that "[f]or complex motions, parties are encouraged to stipulate to or seek a 28 Court order establishing a longer notice period with correspondingly longer periods for response or reply": Deadline for Defendants to file motion: Oct. 12, 2012 3 Deadline for Plaintiffs to file opposition: Nov. 12, 2012 4 Deadline for Defendants to file reply: Dec. 7, 2012 5 Hearing date on motion: The earlier of Dec. 21, 2012 or 6 the Court's next available 7 hearing date at the time the 8 hearing date is reserved by 9 Defendants

3. The Parties stipulate and agree, subject to Court approval, to the 11 following deadlines related to the Case Management Conference: 12 Deadline to hold Rule 26(f) conference: Jan. 7, 2013 13 Deadline to file ADR Certification: Jan. 7, 2013 14 Deadline to file ADR Stipulation or Request 15 for ADR Telephone Conference: Jan. 7, 2013 16 Deadline to file Joint Rule 26(f) Report / CMC Statement: Jan. 28, 2013 17 Deadline to serve Initial Disclosures: Jan. 28, 2013 18 Case Management Conference: Feb. 8, 2013 or at a later 19 date convenient for the 20 Court

4. In exchange for TMC's agreement to forego the formalities of the 22 Hague Service Convention otherwise required for service on TMC, Plaintiffs and 23 TMC agree to the following: (i) TMC will have a total of 90 days to respond to all 24 written discovery requests; (ii) any TMC corporate representative deposition noticed 25 under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) will be done on at least 90 days notice; and (iii) at 26 Defendants' election, any depositions of a corporate representative noticed 27 under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) shall be conducted at a law office selected by 28 Defendants in the Los Angeles area.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No.: C 12-02672 SC

MUI HO, SHELDA ANGLIN, and TED FLORY, individually, and on behalf of ) other members of the general public Assigned to Hon. Samuel Conti similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION, ; and TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC., Defendants.

[PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO ) FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINTSETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE; AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE AND RELATED DATES Complaint filed: May 24, 2012

ORDER

Having read the Parties' Stipulation To Extend Time To Respond To First 3 Amended Class Action Complaint; For Order Setting Briefing Schedule; and 4 Continuing Case Management Conference Date and Related Dates (the 5 "Stipulation"), and good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The deadlines and dates in the Court's Order dated July 30, 2012 [Docket #20] related to the motion to dismiss and case management conference, including the hearing date reserved on November 16, 2012 and the case management conference scheduled for December 7, 2012, are hereby vacated;

2. Toyota Motor Corporation ("TMC") is deemed to be served as of the 12 date of the filing of the Stipulation with the Court. Notwithstanding the date on 13 which service on TMC is deemed to have been effected, TMC shall file a response 14 to the FAC pursuant to paragraph 3 below.

3. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. ("TMS") and TMC shall have until 16 October 12, 2012 to respond to Plaintiffs' FAC. To the extent TMC and TMS' 17 response is a motion, the Parties shall file their respective briefs according to the 18 following schedule: 19 Deadline for Defendants to file motion: Oct. 12, 2012 20 Deadline for Plaintiffs to file opposition: Nov. 12, 2012 21 Deadline for Defendants to file reply: Dec. 7, 2012 22 Hearing date on motion: The earlier of Dec. 21, 2012 or 23 the Court's next available 24 hearing date at the time the 25 hearing date is reserved by 26 Defendants

4. The following schedule related to the Case Management Conference shall apply: 3 Deadline to hold Rule 26(f) conference: Jan. 7, 2013 4 Deadline to file ADR Certification: Jan. 7, 2013 5 Deadline to file ADR Stipulation or Request 6 for ADR Telephone Conference: Jan. 7, 2013 7 Deadline to file Joint Rule 26(f) Report / 8 CMC Statement: Jan. 28, 2013 9 Deadline to serve Initial Disclosures: Jan. 28, 2013 10 Case Management Conference: Feb. 8, 2013 or at a later 11 date convenient for the 12 Court

5. Consistent with the Parties' Stipulation regarding discovery on TMC, 14 the Court orders that: (i) TMC will have a total of 90 days to respond to all written 15 discovery requests; (ii) any TMC corporate representative deposition noticed under 16 Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) will be done on at least 90 days notice; and (iii) at 17 Defendants' election, any depositions of a corporate representative noticed under 18 Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) shall be conducted at a law office selected by Defendants in 19 the Los Angeles area.

IT IS SO ORDERED

ContiN N Samuel Judge

20120910

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



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.