Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03215/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03215-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

Ira Spiro, SBN 067641(ira@spirornos~.com) 

Gregory N. Karasik, SBK 115834 (geg@spiromoss.com) 

Spiro Moss Barness LLP 

11377 W. Olympic Blvd., Fifth Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90064-1683 

Telephone 3 10-235-2468 

Fax: 3 10-235-2456 

Bobby Debes, admitted pro hac vice 

Debes Law Firm 

3DlInternational Tower, 1900 W. Loop South, Suite 1910 

Houston, TX 77027 

bdebes@debeslaw.com 

Telephone (713) 623-0900 

Fax (713) 623-0951 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ROYA KOlKE and ADAM ODNERT, on 

behalf of themselves and all others similarly 

situated, and on behalf of the general public, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs . 

) 

STARBUCKS CORPORATION, and DOES) 

1 through 20, ) 

) 

b 

I 

Defendants. ) 

) 

) 

case NO. c 06 cv 3215 VRW 

STIPULATION RE FURTHER 

CONTINUANCE OF DEADLINE FOR 

COMPLETING CERTlPlCATlON RELATED 

DISCOVERY AND HEARING ON MOTION 

FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION and 

EprOpOSeCIl ORDER THEREON 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

case NO. c 06 cv 3215 VRW 

Case 3:06-cv-03215-VRW Document 64 Filed 09/10/07 Page 1 of 4
Plaintiffs Roya Koike and Adam Odnert ("Plaintiffs"), and defendant Starbucks 

Corporation ("Starbucks"), hereby enter into the following Stipulation and request the Court to 

approve said stipulation and enter an order in accordance therewith. 

STIPULATION 

Background 

1. This case involves claims that Starbucks, as a matter of policy andlor practice, 

fails to pay Assistant Managers for all time worked in violation of California law. Specifically, 

Plaintiffs contend that Assistant Managers are regularly required to work "offthe clock" without 

compensation for that work. Starbucks denies Plaintiffs' allegations, and disputes that this case 

can be maintained as a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

2. Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is presently scheduled to be heard on 

October 11, 2007 (to be followed by a further status conference), which effectively gives 

Plaintiffs until September 6, 2007 to complete certification related discovery and file their 

certification motion. 

3. Due to the nature ofthis case, certification related discovery has been extensive. 

Starbucks has produced more than 12,000 documents to date and the parties have taken 

numerous depositions. The parties have also worked cooperatively to reach stipulations to avoid 

as many depositions as possible. 

Discovery Delays 

4. Despite diligent efforts by all parties, unexpected delays in the course of discovery 

have prevented completion of certification related discovery in sufficient time for Plaintiffs to 

prepare adequately a motion for class certification by September 6, 2007. Certification related 

discovery that remains to be completed includes: 

a) completion of the deposition of Plaintiff Adam Odnert; 

b) supplemental production of documents relating to the job duties of Assistant Managers 

in connection with the Organizing for Growth project; 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

case NO. c 06 cv 3215 VRW 

Case 3:06-cv-03215-VRW Document 64 Filed 09/10/07 Page 2 of 4
c) deposition of the person most knowledgeable from Starbucks about the Organizing for 

Growth project. 

5. Plaintiff did not become aware of the Organizing for Growth project, or the 

existence of additional documents relating to the job duties of Assistant Managers, until 

Starbucks produced a document refercncing the Organizing for Growth project in August 2007 

and Plaintiff took the deposition of the person most knowledgeable for Starbucks about Assistant 

Manager training on August 24,2007. At that time, Plaintiff requested to take another 

deposition, of the person most knowledgeable for Starbucks about the Organizing for Growth 

project. 

6. Starbucks is in the process of locating any additional documents relating to the job 

duties of Assistant Managers in connection with the Organizing for Growth project. The parties 

anticipate that any such documents will be produced, and the remaining certification related 

depositions will be concluded, by the end of September 2007. 

Request for Continuance 

7. As set forth in previous stipulations, the parties have requested, and this Court has 

approved, postponement of the hearing date for Plaintiffs' motion for class certification on 

several occasions to allow for completion of certification related discovery. The parties 

anticipate, and hope, that this will be the last time an extension will be needed. Towards their 

mutual goal of having the class certification issue decided as soon as practicable, the parties 

therefore agree that the class certification hearing and further case management conferencc 

presently scheduled for October 1 1,2007 be continued to a date convenient for the Court no 

sooner than November 15,2007, which will effectively require completion of certification rclated 

discovery and the filing of Plaintiffs' motion for class certification no later than October 11, 

2007. 

General Understandings 

8. Starbucks does not admit or concede that plaintiffs can establish any of the 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

case NO. c 06 CV 3215 vRW 

Case 3:06-cv-03215-VRW Document 64 Filed 09/10/07 Page 3 of 4
requirements for maintaining a class action, and does not admit or concede the relevance of the 

Organizing for Growth project or that a deposition on that topic is appropriate. This stipulation 

shall be without prejudice to any arguments or contentions Starbucks may wish to raise in 

opposition to certification of this case as a class action or at any other time. 

9, This stipulation shall be without prejudice to any other discovery that may be 

sought by either party, or any objections in response thereto. Each party also reserves the right to 

seekmodification or limitation of this stipulation upon a showing of good cause. 

DATED: 2007 SPlRO MOSS BARNESS LLP 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DATED: August yO, - 2007 

BY: 

Mark R. currel 

Attorneys for Defendant 

ORDER 

The foregoing stipulation is hereby approved and the parties are ordered to comply with 

this order. In addition, the Court orders that the class certification hearing and further case 

managanent conference previously scheduled for October 11,2007 shall be continued to 

Dated: 

Unitedstates District Judge 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

case NO. c 06 cv 3215 VRW 

DECEMBER 6

9/10/2007

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Vaughn R Walker

Case 3:06-cv-03215-VRW Document 64 Filed 09/10/07 Page 4 of 4