United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by Comcast
Cable Communications Management, LLC (“Comcast”).
The Court has considered the parties' papers, relevant
legal authority, and the record in this case, and the Court
finds the motion suitable for disposition without oral
argument. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). The Court
hereby DENIES Comcast's motion to dismiss but ORDERS that
Plaintiff Richard Pridmore sit for a deposition no later than
October 6, 2017. In addition, the Court ORDERS Plaintiffs
Leon Gibson, Francisco Flores, Rick Alexander, Robert
Crawford, Bobby Holland, Aaron Arrington, Carlos Estrada,
Joseph Williams, and Gilbert Bacio to SHOW CAUSE why their
actions should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
in these actions are current or former Comcast communications
technicians. In each action, Plaintiffs allege that Comcast
failed to provide legally compliant meal and rest breaks and
also failed to pay Plaintiffs for all hours worked. These
individual actions were filed at the end of 2014 following
the decertification of the Fayerweather v. Comcast,
No. Civ MSC09-01470, case that had been proceeding in
California state court.
deadline for fact discovery in these actions was June 5,
2017. (See, e.g., Williams v. Comcast
Corp., No. 15-cv-4732, Dkt. No. 52). On March 30,
2017, the parties submitted to Magistrate Judge Vadas a
discovery letter brief indicating that dozens of Plaintiffs
in the various individual actions had not sat for deposition.
(Dkt. No. 70, at 1). In this discovery letter brief, Comcast
It is essential that Comcast be allowed to depose all
Plaintiffs before the close of discovery in order to be able
to defend itself in this litigation. In addition, it is
equally essential that Comcast know which Plaintiffs are
actually real litigants who are intent on pursuing their
allegations. Accordingly, Comcast seeks an order compelling
the following individuals to sit for deposition prior to the
close of fact discovery or dismiss their claims . . . .
(Id. at 2.) On April 11, 2017, Judge Vadas ordered:
“No later than April 25, 2017, Plaintiffs are to
provide Defendants with a list of dates and times for the
depositions of the remaining Plaintiffs.” (Dkt. No.
5, 2017-the day fact discovery closed pursuant to this
Court's scheduling order-Plaintiff filed a letter brief
before Judge Vadas seeking additional time to complete the
depositions for Plaintiffs Flores, Bacio, Arrington,
Alexander, Estrada, Crawford, Gibson, Holland, and Williams.
(Dkt. No. 78, at 1.) Plaintiffs' counsel wrote:
For some inexplicable reason, Plaintiffs' counsel have
been unable to contact and confirm deposition dates for these
9 plaintiffs listed above despite numerous efforts to locate
them. . . .
The efforts to locate Plaintiffs has been [sic] extensive.
Plaintiffs' counsel have called, e-mailed, telephoned,
mailed, and skip-traced the above plaintiffs. Despite these
efforts, Plaintiffs' counsel have received no response
and have been unable to locate them. Plaintiffs' counsel
does not know if any attempts to contact them have been
received. We are now working to notify next of kin to see if
we can track these 9 people down through family.
(Dkt. No. 78, at 2.) As a result, Plaintiffs' counsel
requested “an extension to July 5 to allow counsel
additional time to locate the nine plaintiffs referenced
above.” Id. In addition, as to Plaintiff
Richard Pridmore, Plaintiffs' counsel indicated that
Mr.Pridmore's career as a truck driver had impeded his
ability to sit for a deposition and requested relief from the
June 5, 2017 fact discovery deadline. (Id.) Counsel
stated that “Plaintiff [Mr. Pridmore] agrees to sit for
a deposition in the near future.” (Id.)
following day, Judge Vadas denied Plaintiffs' discovery
letter brief. (Dkt. No. 79.) Judge Vadas recognized that
“[a]ny request for a change to the court's
scheduling order must be addressed to the presiding judge,
District Judge Jeffrey S. White.” (Id. at 1.)
Plaintiffs never filed a motion or otherwise sought relief
from the fact discovery deadline from this Court.
31, 2017, Comcast filed the instant motion to dismiss.