Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02367/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02367-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 42:405 Fair Housing Act

---

1

Case No. 14-CV-02367-LHK 

ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED NOTICE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

THANH HUYNH, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

KATHERINE HARASZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-CV-02367-LHK 

ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED 

NOTICE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

HEARING

Re: Dkt. Nos. 89, 90

On April 1, 2016, Defendants filed an administrative motion to continue the hearing on the 

parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, currently set for April 14, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. ECF 

No. 89. As Defendants note, on November 12, 2015, the Court certified a class action in the 

instant case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). ECF No. 67. Under Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2), the parties were required to provide notice and an opportunity to 

opt out to potential Class Members. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). The parties have not yet sent a 

notice to potential Class Members. Generally, dispositive motions in class actions, which include 

motions for summary judgment, should be decided after all potential Class Members receive 

notice. See, e.g., Schwarzchild v. Tse, 69 F.3d 293, 295 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The purpose of Rule 

23(c)(2) is to ensure that the plaintiff class receives notice of the action well before the merits of 

Case 5:14-cv-02367-LHK Document 92 Filed 04/05/16 Page 1 of 3
2

Case No. 14-CV-02367-LHK 

ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED NOTICE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

the case are adjudicated.”). Accordingly, Defendants request that the Court continue the hearing 

on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment until after notice is sent. 

On April 1, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation which included a proposed Notice and Opt 

Out Form. ECF No. 90. On April 4, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a response to Defendants’ 

administrative motion. ECF No. 91. Plaintiffs contended that although “notice must be sent to the 

Plaintiff class before the summary judgment hearing, the class is not required to respond to the 

notice before the summary judgment motions are heard or decided.” Id. at 4. 

The Ninth Circuit has not applied a bright line rule regarding when notice must be sent, 

when class members must opt out, and when the Court may decide motions for summary 

judgment in the class action context. In Torrisi v. Tucson Electric Power Co., 8 F.3d 1370, 1374 

(9th Cir. 1993), “notice was mailed to some shareholders as late as February 11, 1992,” with the 

settlement hearing scheduled for February 20, 1992. However, after the Ninth Circuit determined 

that many notices had in fact been mailed in January 1992, the Ninth Circuit held that, considering 

all of the circumstances, “the timing of the notice was not inadequate.” Id. at 1375. Similarly, in 

Marshall v. Holiday Magic, Inc., 550 F.2d 1173, 1178 (9th Cir. 1997), the Ninth Circuit upheld 

the district court’s decision to approve the mailing of class notice where there “were 26 days 

between the mailing of the notice and the deadline for opting out.” 

In accordance with Torrisi and Holiday Magic, this Court suggests changing the opt out 

deadline on the proposed Notice from April 14, 2016 to May 5, 2016. In addition, in order to 

streamline the opt out process, the Court proposes that potential Class Members opt out by mailing 

the opt out form to the Court, rather than to Class Counsel and Defendants’ Counsel. Finally, the 

Court has corrected errors and made other suggested edits. All of these changes have been 

incorporated into the attachments accompanying this Order. See ECF No. 92-1 (redline copy of 

Notice); ECF No. 92-2 (redline copy of Opt Out Form); ECF No. 92-3 (clean copy of Notice); 

ECF No. 92-4 (clean copy of Opt Out Form). The Court requests that the parties file a joint 

statement by April 6, 2016 indicating whether the parties agree with the proposed amendments. If 

so, the parties shall file a stipulation amending the proposed Notice and Opt Out Form to conform 

Case 5:14-cv-02367-LHK Document 92 Filed 04/05/16 Page 2 of 3
3

Case No. 14-CV-02367-LHK 

ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED NOTICE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

with these amendments. 

The hearing on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, currently set for April 

14, 2016, at 1:30 p.m., is hereby CONTINUED to May 12, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. A further case 

management conference is also set for May 12, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. The parties shall file their joint 

case management statement by May 5, 2016. The final pretrial conference, currently set for June 

16, 2016, at 1:30 p.m., remains as set. A seven-day jury trial, currently set to begin on June 27, 

2016, at 9:00 a.m., also remains as set. 

CONCLUSION

The relevant deadlines set forth in this Order and the remaining dates in the case schedule 

are as follows:

Scheduled event Date

Deadline to Respond to Court’s Suggested Changes to 

Notice and Opt Out Form

April 6, 2016

Deadline to Opt Out May 5, 2016

Hearing on Dispositive Motions and Further Case 

Management Conference

May 12, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. 

Final Pretrial Conference June 16, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. 

Jury Trial June 27, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.

Length of Trial 7 days 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 5, 2016

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02367-LHK Document 92 Filed 04/05/16 Page 3 of 3