Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03502/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03502-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Fair Credit Reporting Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

REGMON L. HAWKINS, on behalf of

himself and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

S2VERIFY, LLC,

Defendant. /

No. C 15-03502 WHA

ORDER DENYING MOTION 

TO STAY DISCOVERY AND

MODIFYING CLASS

CERTIFICATION DEADLINE

In this putative class action regarding alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting

Act, defendant S2Verify has moved for a stay of all discovery pending the Supreme Court’s

decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robbins, in which oral argument took place on November 2. In

Spokeo, the question pending before the Supreme Court is:

Whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff

who suffers no concrete harm, and who therefore could not

otherwise invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, by authorizing

a private right of action based on a bare violation of a federal

statute. 

In our case, however, named plaintiff Regmon Hawkins has alleged harm going well beyond the

bare violation of a federal statute. Thus, notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s decision in

Spokeo, plaintiff’s case will move forward and discovery will proceed. Defendant’s motion for

a stay of discovery is DENIED.

Case 3:15-cv-03502-WHA Document 44 Filed 11/19/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

It is conceivable, however, that the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo could affect the

construction of a potential class at the Rule 23 stage. Currently, plaintiff’s motion for class

certification is due on February 4, 2016, to be heard on the normal 35-day track. The case

management order shall be modified as follows: Plaintiff’s class certification motion shall be

due on FEBRUARY 4 OR TWENTY-ONE CALENDAR DAYS AFTER the Supreme Court issues its

decision in Spokeo — whichever comes later. To illustrate, if the Supreme Court hands down

the Spokeo decision on January 31, then plaintiff’s class certification motion will be due on

February 21. If Spokeo comes down on January 1, then plaintiff’s class certification motion

will still be due on February 4.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 19, 2015. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-03502-WHA Document 44 Filed 11/19/15 Page 2 of 2