Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02851/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02851-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Petition for Removal

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

SHIRLEY GARNETT, on behalf of 

herself and all others 

similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

ADT LLC, and Does 1 through 

50, inclusive,

Defendants.

CIV. NO. 2:14-02851 WBS DAD

ORDER

----oo0oo----

Plaintiff Shirley Garnett brought this putative class 

action against defendant ADT LLC, asserting claims arising out of 

the alleged failure to reimburse her and others for work-related 

expenses and failure to provide accurate wage statements required 

by California law. On November 16, 2015, plaintiff filed a 

motion for class certification and the hearing was set for 

December 14, 2015. Defendant now moves to continue the hearing 

date and briefing schedule on plaintiff’s motion for class 

Case 2:14-cv-02851-WBS-AC Document 59 Filed 12/02/15 Page 1 of 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

2

certification. In addition, defendant seeks an expansion of the 

limit on the number of depositions permitted under Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure Rule 30.

I. Extension of Time

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), “[w]hen an 

act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, 

for good cause, extend time.” Similarly, under Eastern District 

Local Rule 144(c), “[t]he court may, in its discretion, grant an 

initial extension” of time “ex parte upon the affidavit of 

counsel that a stipulation extending time cannot reasonably be 

obtained, explaining the reasons why such a stipulation cannot be 

obtained and the reasons why the extension is necessary.” 

Defendant’s counsel has submitted an affidavit that 

makes clear that the parties were unable to agree on a revised 

hearing date. (Claxton Decl. ¶ 3 (Docket No. 40-2).) Plaintiff 

agreed to give defendant until December 3, 2015 to oppose her 

motion for class certification but would not agree to any further 

delays. (See Joint Stipulation (Docket No. 45); Pl.’s Opp’n at 4 

(Docket No. 44).) 

Defendant requests that the class certification hearing 

be continued so that it has time to depose the fourteen putative 

class members who submitted declarations in support of 

plaintiff’s motion for class certification and plaintiff’s expert

witness, David Breshears. (Def.’s Mot. at 1 (Docket No. 40).) 

While plaintiff disclosed the names of thousands of putative 

class members and identified them as witnesses likely to have 

relevant information in her initial disclosures, defendant did 

not know which putative class members plaintiff would rely on 

Case 2:14-cv-02851-WBS-AC Document 59 Filed 12/02/15 Page 2 of 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

3

until plaintiff filed her motion for class certification and

attached declarations. (Def.’s Mot. at 11, Ex. B at 3.) 

Defendant has deposed several putative class members in the past 

few weeks but has not had time to depose all fourteen. (Joint 

Stipulation at 1.) Without an extension of time, defendant would 

be unable to conduct all of its desired depositions before filing 

its opposition on December 3, 2015. (Def.’s Mot. at 10.) The 

court finds that this is sufficient to establish good cause. 

Continuing the hearing for class certification will not 

cause any significant delays in the case. According to the 

parties’ joint stipulation regarding the case schedule, the 

deadline for class certification motions is not until March 1, 

2016 and discovery is open until January 25, 2016. (Docket No. 

20.) 

Accordingly, the court finds that defendant has 

established good cause and the December 14, 2015 hearing will be 

continued until March 21, 2016 at 1:30 p.m.

II. Additional Depositions

According to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30, a

“party must obtain leave of court, and the court must grant leave 

to the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)(2)” if the parties have 

not stipulated to the deposition and “the deposition would result 

in more than 10 depositions being taken.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 

30(a)(2)(A)(i). The Advisory Committee Notes explain that the 

two objectives of Rule 30 are to “emphasize that counsel have a 

professional obligation to develop a mutual cost-effective plan 

for discovery in the case” and “to assure judicial review under 

the standards stated in Rule 26(b)(2) before any side will be 

Case 2:14-cv-02851-WBS-AC Document 59 Filed 12/02/15 Page 3 of 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

4

allowed to take more than ten depositions in a case without 

agreement of the other parties.” Advisory Committee Notes for 

1993 Amendments to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30. Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 26(b)(2) provides that the court may limit the extent 

of discovery otherwise allowed by the rules if it determines that 

the discovery is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative or the 

burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely 

benefit. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C). 

Defendant requests an expansion of the limit on the 

number of depositions permitted under Rule 30 in order to depose 

all fourteen putative class members who submitted declarations 

and plaintiff’s expert witness. Given the complexity of class 

actions and the number of putative class members who submitted 

declarations in support of plaintiff’s motion for class 

certification, the court will grant defendant’s request for 

additional depositions. The court therefore grants defendant 

permission to conduct twenty depositions. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the class certification 

hearing is continued from December 14, 2015 until March 21, 2016

at 1:30 p.m. and defendant is granted permission to take twenty

depositions. 

Dated: December 2, 2015

Case 2:14-cv-02851-WBS-AC Document 59 Filed 12/02/15 Page 4 of 4