Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04858/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04858-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-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

MICHAEL HENRY,

Plaintiff,

v.

HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-04858-JST 

SCHEDULING ORDER

The Court hereby sets the following case deadlines pursuant to the agreement of the 

parties, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, and Civil Local Rule 16-10:

Event Deadline

Deadline to complete private mediation November 20, 2015

Opening class certification brief due March 2, 2016

Opposition to class certification due May 2, 2016

Reply brief in support of class certification due June 1, 2016

Class certification hearing June 16, 2016

The Court will conduct a further case management conference on June 3, 2015 at 2:00 p.m. 

A joint case management statement is due ten court days beforehand. 

Counsel may not modify these dates without leave of court. The parties shall comply with 

the Court’s standing orders, which are available at cand.uscourts.gov/jstorders.

The parties must take all necessary steps to conduct discovery, compel discovery, hire 

counsel, retain experts, and manage their calendars so that they can complete discovery in a timely 

Case 3:14-cv-04858-JST Document 21 Filed 02/12/15 Page 1 of 2
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

manner and appear on the noticed and scheduled dates. All counsel must arrange their calendars 

to accommodate these dates, or arrange to substitute or associate in counsel who can. 

Dates set by this Court should be regarded as firm. Requests for continuance are 

disfavored. The Court will not consider any event subsequently scheduled by a party, partycontrolled witness, expert or attorney that conflicts with the above dates as good cause to grant a 

continuance. The Court will not consider the pendency of settlement discussions as good cause to 

grant a continuance. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2015

________________________________________

_______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-04858-JST Document 21 Filed 02/12/15 Page 2 of 2