Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_18-cv-03845/USCOURTS-cand-5_18-cv-03845-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 15:1938 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

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

ERIBERTO LIZARRAGA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BILL HAMILTON ROOFING, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 18-cv-03845-SVK 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO EXTEND 

CLASS CERTIFICATION DISCOVERY

Re: Dkt. Nos. 34, 36

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for a ninety-day extension of the Court’s May 15, 

2019 deadline to complete class certification discovery. ECF 34. The Parties’ dispute centers on a

voluntary discovery agreement between the Parties, under which Defendants agreed to produce 

certain documents in lieu of Plaintiffs serving formal discovery requests. Id. at 2–4. Plaintiffs 

contend that Defendants failed to produce the agreed upon documents, forcing Plaintiffs to seek 

formal discovery and creating the need to extend class certification discovery. Id. at 3–5. 

Defendants argue that their document productions have been both responsive and substantial, that 

Plaintiffs reneged on the voluntary discovery agreement with the service of formal discovery and 

that Plaintiffs’ failure to complete class certification discovery is due to their own delay. ECF 36. 

The Court held oral argument on Plaintiffs’ motion on May 14, 2019. 

The Parties submitted a detailed history of their voluntary agreement, meet and confer 

efforts and discovery disputes. ECF 34; ECF 36. This history shows that both sides failed to fulfil 

obligations under their voluntary agreement. In that agreement, Defendants agreed to produce 

employee paystubs, which include putative class member contact information. ECF 34-2; 

ECF 34-3. As the Court noted at the hearing, rather than waiting until the eve of the close of class 

certification discovery and then seeking to disrupt the entire case schedule, Plaintiffs should have 

Case 5:18-cv-03845-SVK Document 39 Filed 05/15/19 Page 1 of 4
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

sought relief through a timely motion to compel. Although the Parties dispute the current status of 

the agreement, the Court finds that production of the unredacted paystubs along with adequate 

employee contact information provides the most efficient solution to the Parties’ dispute with the 

least disruption to the case schedule. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiffs’ 

motion and ORDERS as follows:

• By May 21, 2019, Defendants shall either produce or make available for inspection the 

unredacted paystubs with the putative class member contact information. In addition to the 

contact information set forth on the paystubs, Defendants shall provide the putative class 

members’ last known telephone numbers in Defendants’ possession. 

• Prior to Defendants’ production on May 21, 2019, Plaintiffs shall (1) adapt and prepare 

this District’s model stipulated protective order for standard litigation1for Defendants’ 

approval and (2) file the stipulated protective order for the Court’s approval. Once the 

protective order is filed, the Parties may proceed on the schedule set forth herein, without 

waiting for the Court to enter the protective order. 

In light of this production and the Parties’ positions leading up to this dispute, the Court 

finds that only a modest extension of the case schedule is appropriate. The Court sets the 

following amended case schedule: 

////

////

////

////

////

////

////

////

 

1 This District’s model stipulated protective order for standard litigation is available at 

https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/model-protective-orders. 

Case 5:18-cv-03845-SVK Document 39 Filed 05/15/19 Page 2 of 4
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Scheduled Event Old Dates New Dates

Close of Class Certification 

Discovery 

May 15, 2019 June 14, 2019

Class Certification Motion 

Deadline 

June 14, 2019 July 16, 2019

Class Certification Motion 

Hearing 

NA August 20, 2019 at 10:00 a.m.

Close of Fact Discovery September 13, 2019 October 15, 2019

Further Case Management 

Conference

August 6, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. October 29, 2019 at 9:30 a.m.

Expert Disclosures September 30, 2019 November 8, 2019 

Rebuttal Expert Disclosures October 18, 2019 December 6, 2019 

Close of Expert Discovery October 31, 2019 January 15, 2020

Last Day to File Dispositive 

Motions

November 14, 2019 January 28, 2020

Hearing on Dispositive 

Motions

December 19, 2019 March 3, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.

Final Pretrial Conference January 30, 2020

Filing Dates: 

January 16, 2020; 

January 23, 2020

April 2, 2020 

Filing Dates: 

March 19, 2020; 

March 26, 2020 

Jury/Bench Trial February 10, 2020 April 13, 2020 

////

////

////

////

////

////

Case 5:18-cv-03845-SVK Document 39 Filed 05/15/19 Page 3 of 4
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Finally, at the hearing, Plaintiffs complained of the sufficiency of Defendants’ production 

of “job files.” This specific production issue was not addressed in the Parties’ submissions to the 

Court. The Parties are ORDERED to meet and confer regarding any outstanding discovery 

disputes that relate to class certification and to resolve them promptly. There will be no further 

adjustments to the case schedule. 

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 15, 2019

SUSAN VAN KEULEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:18-cv-03845-SVK Document 39 Filed 05/15/19 Page 4 of 4