Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-00829/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-00829-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 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 

PA/52194372.3/3003187-0000313787 Case No. C05 00829 JW (HRL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO ALLOW THE PARTIES TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATIONS 

PA/52194526.1/3003187-0000313787

Bingham McCutchen LLP 

WENDY M. LAZERSON (SBN 97285) 

CAROLYN B. HALL (SBN 212311) 

1900 University Avenue 

East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2223 

Telephone: (650) 849-4400 

Facsimile: (650) 849-4800 

Attorneys for Defendants 

BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC. 

and GEORGE WESTON BAKERIES, INC. 

IRA SPIRO (SBN 67641) 

DENNIS F. MOSS (SBN 77512) 

Spiro Moss Barness and Barge LLP 

11377 W. Olympic Blvd., Fifth Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90064 

Telephone: (310) 235-2468 

Facsimile: (310) 235-2456 

E-mail:ispiro@smbhblaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN JOSE DIVISION 

THOMAS LEONARD, CHARLIE BRADARIC, 

GARY HOSKINS, LARRY BRIAN NEWMAN, 

JR., CHRIS HERR, and WILLIAM F. 

HARRISON, each of them individually, and on 

behalf of: all others similarly situated, the general 

public, and similarly situated current and former 

employees of Defendants., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC., BESTFOODS 

BAKING COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 10, 

Defendants. 

No. C05 00829 JW (HRL) 

CLASS ACTION AND FLSA 

COLLECTIVE ACTION 

Assigned To The Honorable James 

Ware 

ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST TO 

ALLOW THE PARTIES TO EXCEED 

PAGE LIMITATIONS; STIPULATION 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Complaint filed: February 25, 2005 

-------------

---------------

Case 5:05-cv-00829-JW Document 189 Filed 01/10/07 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 

PA/52194372.3/3003187-0000313787 2 Case No. C05 00829 JW (HRL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO ALLOW THE PARTIES TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATIONS

PA/52194526.1/3003187-0000313787 

Pursuant to Northern District Civil Local Rule 7-11, Plaintiffs Thomas Leonard et 

al. and Defendants Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. and George Weston Bakeries, Inc. (together, “the 

Parties”), respectfully request that the Court permit the parties to file memoranda of points and 

authorities in support of the Parties’ respective motions for summary judgment and oppositions 

to the opposing Parties’ motions for summary judgment that exceed the page limitation by 15 

pages, to 40 pages, and that this increase apply to only one motion for summary judgment for 

plaintiffs and one for defendants. Civil Local Rules 7-2(b) and 7-4(b) state that a motion and an 

opposition to a motion may not exceed 25 pages. 

The Parties intend to file motions for summary judgment in January 2007. These 

motions are of great importance, inasmuch as they are intended by the moving parties to be 

dispositive of some or all the issues in the case. 

There are a large number of issues in this complex case, which is styled as both an 

“opt-in” collective action pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and a “opt-out” 

class action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and which seeks to 

represent a proposed plaintiff class of approximately 1400. Plaintiffs assert 12 claims under both 

federal and California law: 

• failure to pay overtime in violation of FLSA and California law; 

• failure to pay both the federal and California minimum wage; 

• “off the clock” work in violation of FLSA and California law; 

• violation of FLSA and California recordkeeping requirements; 

• failure to provide meal and rest periods in violation of California law; 

• failure to pay wages upon termination in violation of California law; and 

• unlawful business practices in violation of California Business and 

Professions Code section 17200. 

In response, Defendants assert that Plaintiffs qualify for numerous exemptions to 

the requirements of the FLSA and California state law. Defendants must address each of these 

exemptions and exceptions, and their applicability to each of Plaintiffs’ claims, in its motion for 

------------

Case 5:05-cv-00829-JW Document 189 Filed 01/10/07 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 

PA/52194372.3/3003187-0000313787 3 Case No. C05 00829 JW (HRL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO ALLOW THE PARTIES TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATIONS

PA/52194526.1/3003187-0000313787 

summary judgment. 

On January 2, 2007, counsel for Defendants telephoned counsel for Plaintiffs to 

seek a stipulation permitting the Parties to exceed the page limitations by 15 pages. On January 

3, 2007, counsel for Plaintiffs telephoned counsel for Defendants and expressed his agreement to 

such an extension of the page limits, so long as the Parties agreed that each Party could file a 

single motion for summary judgment that was up to 40 pages long, each Party could file an 

opposition that was up to 40 pages long, and the Parties would not seek an extension of the page 

limits for any reply briefs. 

STIPULATION

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED by Plaintiffs and Defendants, being all 

parties of record to this action, that, based on the above stated facts and subject to the Court’s 

approval, the Court order as follows: 

1. Plaintiffs on one hand, and Defendants on the other hand, hereby stipulate 

and agree that the summary judgment motions submitted by Plaintiffs and Defendants may each 

be up to 40 pages long, and that any opposition to each summary judgment motion filed by the 

Parties may be up to 40 pages long. Any reply briefs may be up to 15 pages long, pursuant to 

Civil Local Rule 7-3(c). These increased page limitations shall apply to only one motion for 

summary judgment for plaintiffs and one for defendants. 

DATED: January 7, 2007 Bingham McCutchen LLP 

By: /s/ 

Wendy Lazerson 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Spiro Moss Barness and Barge LLP 

By: /s/ 

Ira Spiro 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

// 

-------------

Case 5:05-cv-00829-JW Document 189 Filed 01/10/07 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 

PA/52194372.3/3003187-0000313787 4 Case No. C05 00829 JW (HRL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO ALLOW THE PARTIES TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATIONS

PA/52194526.1/3003187-0000313787 

[Proposed] ORDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

 THE HONORABLE JAMES WARE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

------------ Jan 10, 2007 -------------

Case 5:05-cv-00829-JW Document 189 Filed 01/10/07 Page 4 of 4