Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02069/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02069-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fair Labor Standards Act

---

-1- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: FILING OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

Louis M. Marlin, Esq. [State Bar No. 054053] 

Stanley D. Saltzman, Esq. [State Bar No. 090058] 

MARLIN & SALTZMAN 

3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100 

Irvine, California 92602 

Telephone: (714) 669-4900 

Facsimile: (714) 669-4750 

Louis.Marlin@MarlinSaltzman.com / SSaltzman@MarlinSaltzman.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated 

Lynne C. Hermle, Esq. [State Bar No. 99779] 

Michael A. Aparicio, Esq. [State Bar No. 206300] 

Jessica R. Perry, Esq. [State Bar No. 209321] 

Amira B. Day, Esq. [State Bar No. 239045] 

ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP 

1000 Marsh Road 

Menlo Park, California 94025 

Telephone: (650) 614-7400 

Facsimile: (650) 614-7401 

lchermle@orrick.com / maparicio@orrick.com 

jperry@orrick.com / aday@orrick.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

WAL-MART STORES, INC. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

In Re WAL-MART STORES, INC. 

WAGE AND HOUR LITIGATION 

This Document Relates To: 

Case Nos. 

C 06 02069 SBA (Smith) and 

CV 06 05411 SBA (Ballard) 

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

Case No.: C 06 02069 SBA 

CLASS ACTION

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: 

FILING OF FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT 

Case 4:06-cv-02069-SBA Document 78 Filed 03/19/07 Page 1 of 5
-2- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: FILING OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

ADDITIONAL PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL 

Arnold W. Schwartz, Esq. [State Bar No. 063436] 

Marcus J. Bradley, Esq. [State Bar No. 174156] 

SCHWARTZ, DANIELS & BRADLEY 

29229 Canwood Street, Suite 208 

Agoura Hills, California 91301 

Telephone: (310) 478-5838 

Facsimile: (310) 478-1232 

Arnold.Schwartz@SchwartzDanielsBradley.com 

Marcus.Bradley@SchwartzDanielsBradley.com 

Peter M. Hart, Esq. [State Bar No. 198691] 

LAW OFFICES OF PETER M. HART 

13952 Bora Bora Way, F-320 

Marina Del Rey, California 90292 

Telephone: (310) 478-5789 

Facsimile: (310) 561-6441 

HartPeter@msn.com 

A.E. “Bud” Bailey, Pro Hac Vice [OSB No. 87157; WSB No. 33917] 

J. Dana Pinney, Pro Hac Vice [OSB No. 75308; WSB No. 33919; DC No. 

473833] 

MEMBERS OF BAILEY PINNEY PC 

1498 S.E. Tech Center Place, Suite 290 

Vancouver, Washington 98683 

Telephone: (360) 567-2551 

Facsimile: (360) 567-3331 

BBailey@wagelawyer.com 

JDPinney@wagelawyer.com 

Bonnie R. MacFarlane, Esq. [State Bar No. 161526] 

LAW OFFICES OF BONNIE R. MAC FARLANE 

720 Howe Ave, Suite 113 

Sacramento, California 95825 

Telephone: (800) 230-5528 

Facsimile: (800) 230-5866 

BMacfarlane@wagelawyer.com

Case 4:06-cv-02069-SBA Document 78 Filed 03/19/07 Page 2 of 5
-3- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: FILING OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

 Plaintiffs BARRY SMITH, MICHAEL WIGGINS, DANTON BALLARD, and 

NATHAN LYONS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated 

(hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Plaintiffs”) and Defendant WAL-MART 

STORES, INC. (“Defendant”) (collectively “the parties”), through their respective 

counsel, hereby stipulate as follows: 

 WHEREAS, the action entitled Barry Smith and Michael Wiggins v. Wal-Mart 

Stores, Inc., U.S.D.C. Case No. CV-06 02069 SBA (“Smith Action”) was commenced 

in this District on March 20, 2006, with the filing of the original Complaint (C-06 

05411 JSW); 

 WHEREAS, the action entitled Danton Ballard and Nathan Lyons, etc. v. WalMart Stores, Inc., U.S.D.C. Case No. CV 06 3790 RSWL, (“Ballard Action”) was 

filed on May 17, 2006, in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los 

Angeles; 

 WHEREAS, on June 16, 2006, Wal-Mart removed the Ballard action to the 

United States District Court, Central District of California; 

 WHEREAS, the parties stipulated to the transfer of venue of the Ballard action 

to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1404(a) on August 7, 2006; 

 WHEREAS, on September 28, 2006, the Court ordered the Smith Action and 

the Ballard Action related pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12; 

 WHEREAS, on January 9, 2007, the Court ordered the Smith Action and the 

Ballard Action consolidated pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 42(a);

 WHEREAS, on January 9, 2007, the Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class 

Action Complaint; 

 WHEREAS, on February 8, 2007, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss the 

Consolidated Class Action Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

12(b)(6) and a Motion to Strike pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(f) 

calendared for hearing on March 27, 2007; 

/ / / 

Case 4:06-cv-02069-SBA Document 78 Filed 03/19/07 Page 3 of 5
-4- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: FILING OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

 WHEREAS, in the interests of efficiency, and to avoid successive Motions to 

Dismiss and Motions to Strike, the Plaintiffs wish to file a First Amended 

Consolidated Complaint. 

 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS: 

 1. Leave to file Plaintiffs’ Proposed First amended Consolidated Class 

Action Complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit A, should be granted; 

2. Plaintiffs shall file the First Amended Consolidated Class Action 

Complaint no later than 10 days from the entry of this Order. 

3. Conditioned upon the Court granting such leave and the filing of the First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the 

Consolidated Class Action Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

12(b)(6) and Motion to Strike pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(f), 

calendared for March 27, 2007, are withdrawn; provided, however, that if the Court 

has not approved this Stipulation by March 16, 2007, Defendant will re-notice the 

motions to give Plaintiffs the time to file an opposition that is provided for in the 

Local Rules; 

 4. Defendant’s withdrawal of the Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike is 

without prejudice to Defendant’s right to file new motions in response to Plaintiffs’ 

First Amended Consolidated Complaint; and 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 4:06-cv-02069-SBA Document 78 Filed 03/19/07 Page 4 of 5
-5- 

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: FILING OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

 5. Defendant shall respond to the First Amended Consolidated Class Action 

Complaint within 20 days of its filing. 

DATED: March 7, 2007 MARLIN & SALTZMAN 

 SCHWARTZ, DANIELS & BRADLEY 

 LAW OFFICES OF PETER M. HART 

 BAILEY PINNEY, PC 

 LAW OFFICES OF BONNIE R. MAC FARLANE 

 / S / 

 By: _____________________________________ 

 MARCUS J. BRADLEY 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DATED: March 7, 2007 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP 

 / S / 

 By: _____________________________________ 

 LYNNE C. HERMLE 

 MICHAEL A. APARICIO 

 JESSICA R. PERRY 

 AMIRA B. DAY 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 ORDER 

 The foregoing stipulation having been entered, and good cause appearing, 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 3/19/07 _______________________________________ 

 HONORABLE SAUNDRA B. ARMSTRONG 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

Case 4:06-cv-02069-SBA Document 78 Filed 03/19/07 Page 5 of 5