Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-01314/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-01314-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

816181.2 1 CV 09 1314 JSW

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS 

CERTIFICATION 

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 

DANIEL L. WARSHAW (SBN 185365) 

(dwarshaw@pswplaw.com) 

PEARSON, SIMON, WARSHAW & PENNY, LLP 

15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400 

Sherman Oaks, California 91403 

Telephone: (818) 788-8300 

Facsimile: (818) 788-8104 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class, 

Additional Counsel Listed on Signature Page 

CHAD A. STEGEMAN (SBN 225745) 

(cstegeman@akingump.com)

AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 

580 California Street, Suite 1500 

San Francisco, California 94104 

Telephone: (415) 765-9500 

Facsimile: (415) 765-9501 

JAMES J. SCHESKE (admitted pro hac vice) 

(jscheske@akingump.com) 

AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 

300 West 6th Street, Suite 2100 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Telephone: (512) 499-6200 

Facsimile: (512) 499-6290 

Attorneys for Defendant Acer America Corporation 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

LORA and CLAY WOLPH, on behalf of 

themselves and all others similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

ACER AMERICA CORPORATION, a 

California corporation, 

Defendant. 

 Case No. CV 09 1314 JSW 

CLASS ACTION 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING 

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS 

CERTIFICATION 

 

 Plaintiffs LORA AND CLAY WOLPH (“PLAINTIFFS”) and Defendant ACER AMERICA 

CORPORATION (“DEFENDANT”) hereby enter the following Joint Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 

Regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (“Order”) in the above-captioned proceeding: 

Case 3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document 81 Filed 07/09/10 Page 1 of 5 Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document80 Filed07/08/10 Page1 of 5
816181.2 2 CV 09 1314 JSW

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS 

CERTIFICATION 

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 on April 15, 2010 the Court entered an Order Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion for Class 

Certification and Mediation Completion Date ("Continuance Order"). See Docket No. 78. The current 

briefing schedule pursuant to the Continuance Order requires PLAINTIFFS to file their Motion for 

Class Certification on July 22, 2010, DEFENDANT to file its Opposition to PLAINTIFFS’ Motion for 

Class Certification on September 21, 2010; PLAINTIFFS to file their Reply to DEFENDANT’S 

Opposition on October 21, 2010, and sets the hearing for PLAINTIFFS' Motion for Class Certification 

on Friday, December 10, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.; 

WHEREAS at the time of the Continuance Order the parties tentatively scheduled the following 

discovery to be completed in May 2010: (1) DEFENDANT’S search and production of all relevant 

documents requested by PLAINTIFFS; (2) the production of documents in the possession, custody or 

control of the Taiwanese corporation Acer, Inc.; and (3) the production of documents subpoenaed by 

PLAINTIFFS from Microsoft Corporation; 

WHEREAS since entry of the Continuance Order, all of the aforementioned discovery is not yet 

complete and some of those items are the subject of ongoing meet and confers; 

WHEREAS, since entry of the Continuance Order, DEFENDANT has produced additional 

documents and electronically stored information; DEFENDANT has responded to the written 

discovery propounded by PLAINTIFFS; PLAINTIFFS have taken the depositions of two (2) of 

DEFENDANT’S F.R.C.P. 30(b)(6) designees in Austin, Texas and San Francisco, California; 

PLAINTIFFS issued a subpoena duces tecum and received an initial document production from 

Microsoft Corporation consisting of 363 pages; PLAINTIFFS have taken the deposition of Microsoft 

Corporation’s designee in Bellevue, Washington; DEFENDANT has taken the depositions of the 

PLAINTIFFS in Fostoria, Ohio; and the parties met and conferred numerous times regarding 

outstanding issues relating to the DEFENDANT'S document production; 

WHEREAS after several discussions, the parties have been able to resolve some discovery 

disputes and DEFENDANT is in the process of reviewing and producing additional materials and 

scheduling additional depositions; 

WHEREAS the parties have been unable to resolve some outstanding issues concerning 

Case 3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document 81 Filed 07/09/10 Page 2 of 5 Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document80 Filed07/08/10 Page2 of 5
816181.2 3 CV 09 1314 JSW

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS 

CERTIFICATION 

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 

DEFENDANT’S production of documents to PLAINTIFFS and the parties intend to have an in person 

meet and confer conference and, if necessary, file a joint letter regarding the discovery disputes 

pursuant to this Court’s Civil Standing Order Number 7; 

WHEREAS the documents produced by Microsoft Corporation in response to PLAINTIFFS' 

subpoena were extremely limited requiring the initiation of another meet and confer process to obtain 

the requested documents. Furthermore, PLAINTIFFS contend that the witness produced by Microsoft 

Corporation on July 2, 2010, was not prepared to testify regarding all subjects as noticed and are 

working with counsel for Microsoft Corporation to produce an additional witness and serve an 

additional subpoena; and 

WHEREAS pursuant to the parties’ meet and confer discussions, the parties agree that 

PLAINTIFFS' Motion for Class Certification should again be continued pending resolution of the 

aforementioned discovery issues. 

THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 

1. PLAINTIFFS’ Motion for Class Certification shall be filed on October 18, 2010; 

2. DEFENDANT’S Opposition to PLAINTIFFS’ Motion for Class Certification shall 

be filed on December 17 , 2010; 

3. PLAINTIFFS’ Reply to DEFENDANT’S Opposition to PLAINTIFFS’ Motion for 

Class Certification shall be filed on January 31, 2011 

4. The hearing date on PLAINTIFFS’ Motion for Class Certification shall be set for 

Friday, _______________________at 9:00 a.m. or as soon thereafter at this matter may be heard. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED 

DATED: July 7, 2010 /s/____________________________________________ 

 Daniel L. Warshaw (185365) 

dwarshaw@pswplaw.com 

Bobby Pouya (245527) 

bpouya@pswplaw.com 

Pearson, Simon, Warshaw & Penny, LLP

15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400 

Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 

Telephone: (818) 788-8300 

Facsimile: (818) 788-8104 

Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document80 Filed07/08/10 Page3 of 5

February 15, 2011

Case 3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document 81 Filed 07/09/10 Page 3 of 5
816181.2 4 CV 09 1314 JSW

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS 

CERTIFICATION 

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 

Michael P. Lehmann (77152) 

mlehmann@hausfeldllp.com 

Hausfeld, LLP

44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3400 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 633-1908 

Facsimile: (415) 693-0770 

Richard S. Lewis 

rlewis@hausefeldllp.com 

James J. Pizzirusso 

jpizzirusso@hausfeldllp.com 

Melinda Coolidge 

mcoolidge@hausfeldllp.com 

Hausfeld, LLP

1700 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006 

Telephone: (202) 540-7200 

Facsimile: (202) 540-7201 

Jori Bloom Naegele 

jbnaegele@gmail.com 

Robert D. Gary 

rdgary@gmail.com 

Gary, Naegele & Theado, LLC

446 Broadway Avenue 

Lorain, OH 44052 

Telephone: (440) 244-409 

Facsimile: (440) 244-3462 

Pursuant to General Order 45, I, Daniel L. Warshaw attest that Chad Stegeman has provided his 

authority and concurrence to file the instant document and place his electronic signature on the 

document, as set forth below. 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

Case 3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document 81 Filed 07/09/10 Page 4 of 5 Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document80 Filed07/08/10 Page4 of 5
816181.2 5 CV 09 1314 JSW

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS 

CERTIFICATION 

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 

DATED: July 7, 2010 /s/___________________________________________ 

Chad Stegeman (225745) 

cstegeman@akingump.com 

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

580 California Street, Suite 1500 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 765-9500 

Facsimile: (415) 765-9501 

James J. Scheske 

jscheske@akingump.com 

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

300 West 6th Street, Suite 2100 

Austin, TX 78701 

Telephone: (512) 499-6200 

Facsimile: (512) 499-6290 

Attorneys for Defendant Acer America Corporation

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _____________________ __________________________________________ 

 Honorable Jeffrey S. White 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document80 Filed07/08/10 Page5 of 5

July 9, 2010

Case 3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document 81 Filed 07/09/10 Page 5 of 5