Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06493/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06493-13/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gennady Brin
Plaintiff
Ranjiv Jain
Plaintiff
Madhav Kakani
Plaintiff
Oracle Corporation
Defendant

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MADHAV KAKANI, GENNADY BRIN and

RANJIV JAIN, on behalf of themselves and all

others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

ORACLE CORPORATION,

Defendant. /

No. C 06-06493 WHA

NOTICE OF FURTHER

SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS

RE PROPOSED CLASS

SETTLEMENT

By FRIDAY, JUNE 15, 2007, AT NOON, please address the following further questions:

• How can counsel claim there even is an “agreement” when the two sides cannot

agree on the scope of the release with respect to non-California states’ wage and

hour laws? 

• Cite all reported decisions (pro and con) on the issue of whether a wage and hour

case under § 17200 can be certified nationwide to release claims under the FLSA

and other state wage and hour laws.

With respect to the motion to certify a class (filed before the “settlement” emerged),

defendant is ordered to file its opposition by MONDAY, JUNE 18, 2007 AT NOON. The Court

wishes to understand more fully its arguments as to why a class should not be certified before

ruling on “preliminary approval.” 

Dated: June 13, 2007. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 64 Filed 06/13/07 Page 1 of 1