Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03230/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03230-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND THE TIME TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

-1- 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CASE NO. CV 13-03230 EDL

4816-1178-0396v1 

EKENNEDY\15321004 

CHRISTINE H. LONG, CA STATE BAR NO. 199676 

EILEEN P. KENNEDY, CA STATE BAR NO. 204646 

BERLINER COHEN, LLP

TEN ALMADEN BOULEVARD

ELEVENTH FLOOR

SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113-2233 

TELEPHONE: (408) 286-5800 

FACSIMILE: (408) 998-5388 

christine.long@berliner.com 

kara.arguello@berliner.com 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS BOBBY A. ALI; RICK 

ALI1; M1 COLLISION CARE CENTERS, INC.

2

; AUTOVEST 

COLLISION REPAIRS, INC., DBA AUTOWEST COLLISION 

REPAIRS, INC.; AND AW COLLISION OF SERRAMONTE3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

RAFAEL SANDOVAL, LUIS MARTIN 

CALIXTO, and ADRIAN RAMIREZ on 

behalf of themselves, on behalf of all others 

similarly situated and in the interest of the 

general public, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

BOBBY A. ALI; RICK ALI, M1 AUTO 

COLLISIONS CENTERS, INC.; M1 

COLLISION CARE CENTERS, INC.; 

AUTOVEST COLLISION REPAIRS, INC. 

aka AUTOWEST COLLISION REPAIRS, 

INC.; and SERRAMONTE AUTO PLAZA 

BODY SHOP, INC., 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO. CV 13-03230 EDL 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

TO EXTEND THE TIME TO HEAR 

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS 

Judge: Hon. Elizabeth LaPorte 

 

1

 Defendants Bobby Ali and Rick Ali were dismissed with prejudice, in part, by the Court’s Order of 7/10/2014. 

2

 Erroneously sued as “M1 Auto Collisions Centers, Inc.” 

3

 Erroneously sued as “Serramonte Auto Plaza Body Shop, Inc.” 

AS MODIFIED

Case 3:13-cv-03230-EDL Document 178 Filed 01/08/16 Page 1 of 5
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND THE TIME TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

-2- 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CASE NO. CV 13-03230 EDL

4816-1178-0396v1 

EKENNEDY\15321004 

The Parties to the above entitled action, by and through their respective counsel of record, 

submit this Stipulation and Proposed Order to continue the deadline to hear dispositive motions from 

March 1, 2016 to July 15, 2016. 

The parties have met and conferred and agree as follows: 

1. On June 18, 2014, the Court issued a Case Management Order which set the hearing for 

class certification as April 28, 2015. The last date for hearing dispositive motions was 

then set for August 4, 2015. Moving parties are required to file motion papers no later 

than 35 days prior to the hearing date. The Court moved the class certification hearing to 

July 14, 2014 and the last date to hear dispositive motions was moved to November 3, 

2015, requiring dispositive motion papers to be filed and served no later than September 

29, 2015. Further, the Court entered an Order on August 14, 2015 extending the fact 

discovery cut-off to November 10, 2015. On September 9, 2015, the Court issued its 

Order on Plaintiffs’ Class Certification and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and to 

Disqualify (“Certification Order”), leaving the parties with only twenty days to prepare 

and file dispositive motions. On October 5, 2015, the Court entered an Order per 

stipulation by the parties to extend the deadline to hear dispositive motions to March 1, 

2016. This deadline was set for that date, in part, to accommodate an opt-in period of 90 

days, should the Court so order. On October 6, 2015, the Court ordered a 90 day opt-in 

period. The parties have met and conferred over the class notice and have finalized 

English and Spanish language versions that the Parties anticipate will be mailed out by 

January 10, 2016. 

2. In the Certification Order, the Court conditionally certified a class under Fair Labor 

Standards Act (“FLSA”) and requested that the parties submit a proposed joint letter and 

class notice under FLSA §216(B). On September 23, 2015, the parties submitted a 

proposed class notice with each party proposing different opt-in deadlines together with a 

joint letter regarding the disputed issues regarding the class notice. In an Order, filed on 

October 6, 2015, the Court set the opt-in deadline for 90 days from the date of mailing 

and that the class notice should reflect that the signed opt-in notices be returned to the 

Case 3:13-cv-03230-EDL Document 178 Filed 01/08/16 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND THE TIME TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

-3- 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CASE NO. CV 13-03230 EDL

4816-1178-0396v1 

EKENNEDY\15321004 

class administrator, rather than Plaintiffs’ counsel. The parties anticipate that the class 

notices will be mailed no later than January 10, 2016. The Court also certified a class 

under Fed. Rule of Civ. Proc. §23(b)(3). There is no order or proposed schedule for this 

opt-out class. 

3. The Court has recently granted in part and denied in part, Plaintiffs’ motion to compel 

production of certain time and payroll records. The Court has also recently granted 

Defendants’ Motion to Compel further responses to Special Interrogatories relating 

Plaintiffs’ damage claims. The Parties expect that the production of class member 

records and service of further discovery responses will occur over the coming weeks. 

Under the current Case Management Schedule, the parties could be forced to bring all 

dispositive motions prior to this production, and would certainly have to bring their 

motions prior to the completion of the FLSA 216(B) opt in process and Rule 23(b)(3) opt 

out period. 

4. Consequently, the parties propose extending the date to hear dispositive motions from 

March 1, 2016 to July , 2016. 

5. No trial date has been set yet, and no deadline for merits expert disclosures and 

completion of merits expert discovery. 

6. Good cause exists for the following reasons. Under the current time restrictions, the 

parties are forced to bring dispositive motions before the class certification of FLSA 

claim has been fully decided and before the Rule 23(b)(3) class has been notified and 

provided an opportunity to opt-out. The opt-in and opt-out procedures may impact 

whether the parties elect to bring certain dispositive motions (for example, summary 

adjudication or decertification). The proposed deadline to hear dispositive motions 

would accommodate the current opt-in period for the conditional FLSA class 

notification. Furthermore, additional fact and expert discovery may be necessary or 

anticipated to support or to oppose anticipated dispositive motions. The parties have 

been diligent in conducting discovery. Fact discovery closed as of November 10, 2015; 

however, the parties are currently meeting and conferring on scheduling two remaining 

Case 3:13-cv-03230-EDL Document 178 Filed 01/08/16 Page 3 of 5
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND THE TIME TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

-4- 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CASE NO. CV 13-03230 EDL

4816-1178-0396v1 

EKENNEDY\15321004 

depositions and on proposed orders relating to the Defendants’ production of class 

member records and Plaintiffs’ further responses to interrogatories. 

DATED: JANUARY 7, 2016 BERLINER COHEN, LLP 

BY: /S/ EILEEN P. KENNEDY

 CHRISTINE H. LONG

EILEEN P. KENNEDY

 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS BOBBY A. ALI;

RICK ALI; M1 COLLISION CARE CENTERS, INC.;

AUTOVEST COLLISION REPAIRS, INC., DBA 

AUTOWEST COLLISION REPAIRS, INC.; AND AW

COLLISION OF SERRAMONTE

DATED: JANUARY 7, 2016 MALLISON & MARTINEZ & JUSTICE AT WORK

LAW GROUP 

BY: /S/ MARCO A. PALAU

 TOMAS MARGAIN

JUSTICE AT WORK LAW GROUP

STAN S. MALLISON

HECTOR R. MARTINEZ

MARCO A PALAU

JOSEPH D. SUTTON

ERIC S. TRABUCCO

MALLISON & MARTINEZ

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS AND CLASS 

 

Case 3:13-cv-03230-EDL Document 178 Filed 01/08/16 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND THE TIME TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

-5- 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CASE NO. CV 13-03230 EDL

4816-1178-0396v1 

EKENNEDY\15321004 

PER STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED. 

Dated: _____________ ___________________________________ 

 Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

January 8, 2016

Case 3:13-cv-03230-EDL Document 178 Filed 01/08/16 Page 5 of 5