UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION (CINCINNATI) 

HAWES, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

MACY’S INC., et al., 

Defendants. 

Civil Action: 1:17-CV-00754 

Judge Timothy S. Black 

Rule 26(f) Report of Parties 

1. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), a meeting was held on July 17, 2019, and was 

attended by: Drew Lagando of Landskroner Grieco Merriman, LLC, Charles Schaffer of Levin 

Sedran & Berman, LLP, and Brendan Thompson of Cuneo Gilbert and LaDuca, LLP, counsel for 

Plaintiffs, and Jennifer Van Zant and Ryan Fairchild of Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & 

Leonard, LLP and Beth Bryan of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, counsel for Defendant. 

2. The parties will exchange pre-discovery disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 

26(a)(1) by September 16, 2019. 

3. The parties do not unanimously consent to the jurisdiction of the United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 

4. Recommended cut-off date for filing of motions directed to the pleadings: 

August 29, 2019. 

5. Recommended cut-off date for filing any motion to amend the pleadings and/or to 

add additional parties: September 16, 2019. 

6. Recommended discovery plan: 

a. Describe the subjects on which discovery is to be sought and the nature, extent 

and scope of discovery that each party needs to: (i) make a settlement 

evaluation, (ii) prepare for case dispositive motions, and (iii) prepare for trial: 

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 1 of 8 PAGEID #: 816
2 

Plaintiffs’ Position: Plaintiffs intend to serve interrogatories and document requests 

regarding Defendant’s research, development, production, marketing, labeling, pricing, and sale of 

the products at issue. Plaintiffs will inquire regarding any surveys or research, either internal or 

conducted through third parties, regarding consumers’ perceptions of the Products and any 

information or documents regarding the products’ pricing, including third-party pricing data. 

Plaintiffs also intend to depose Defendant’s corporate representatives regarding these topics, and 

will likely notice depositions of fact witnesses identified in Defendant’s disclosures, discovery 

responses, and documents. 

Defendant’s Position: The Defendant intends to take discovery regarding whether the 

action is appropriate for class certification, Plaintiffs’ reasons for purchasing and experience with 

the sheets in question, Plaintiffs’ allegations in the complaint, including with regard to alleged 

misrepresentations, the test results for the sheets, the appropriate methods of testing the sheets, and 

any advertising or representations relied on by Plaintiffs. 

b. What changes should be made, if any, in the limitations on discovery imposed 

under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the local rules of this Court, 

including the limitations to 25 interrogatories/requests for admissions and the 

limitations of 10 depositions, each lasting no more than one day consisting of 

seven (7) hours? 

None. 

c. Additional recommended limitations on discovery: 

The parties propose the following schedule for case management: 

Description Parties’ Proposal 

Rule 26(a)(1) Disclosures: September 16, 2019 

Factual and Expert Discovery 

Deadline: 

October 30, 2020 

Plaintiff’s Expert Disclosures 

for Class Certification: 

May 4, 2020 

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 2 of 8 PAGEID #: 817
3 

Deadline to File Class 

Certification Motion: 

May 4, 2020 

Rebuttal Expert Disclosures 

for Class Certification: 

June 30, 2020 

Response to Class Certification 

Motion, including Daubert

challenges relevant to class 

certification: 

July 15, 2020 

Reply in Support of Class 

Certification and response to 

Daubert challenges relevant to 

class certification: 

August 17, 2020 

Hearing on Class Certification 

Motion 

At the Court’s convenience 

Plaintiff’s Expert Disclosures 

for Trial 

October 2, 2020 

Defendant’s Expert 

Disclosures 

December 2, 2020 

Deadline to File Dispositive 

Motions: 

30 days after Discovery 

Deadline 

Responses to Dispositive 

Motions: 

24 days after Dispositive 

Motions 

Replies in Support of 

Dispositive Motions: 

17 days after Response to 

Dispositive Motions 

Final Pretrial Conference: 21 days in advance of the trial 

date. 

Trial Date: At the Court’s convenience 

d. Recommended date for disclosure of lay witnesses: 30 days in advance of the 

trial date. 

e. Describe the areas in which expert testimony is expected and indicate whether 

each expert has been or will be specifically retained within the meaning of 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2). 

The parties anticipate retaining expert witnesses specifically for the purpose to 

provide expert witness testimony on issues related to class certification and on 

the merits including the appropriate method(s) for counting the threads 

contained in the relevant sheets. 

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 3 of 8 PAGEID #: 818
4 

f. Recommended date for making primary expert designations: See above 

proposed schedule. 

g. Recommended date for making rebuttal expert designations: See above 

proposed schedule. 

h. The parties have electronically stored information in the following formats: 

Defendant anticipates producing electronically stored information in useable 

formats including in pdf and/or in excel spreadsheets. 

The case presents the following issues relating to disclosure or discovery of 

electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should 

be produced: 

The parties do not anticipate large amounts of information being disclosed in 

formats other than pdf and in native format for excel spreadsheets. 

i. The case presents the following issues relating to claims of privilege or of 

protection as trial preparation materials:

The parties plan to seek a Confidentiality Order to address any issues with 

regard to protections on discovery materials. 

Have the parties agreed on a procedure to assert such claims AFTER

production? 

__________ No 

__________ Yes 

_____X_____ Yes, and the parties ask that the Court include 

their agreement in an order. (To be included 

in the proposed Confidentiality Order.) 

j. Recommended discovery cut-off date: See above proposed schedule. 

k. Recommended dispositive motion date: See above proposed schedule. 

7. Recommended date for status conference (if any): 

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 4 of 8 PAGEID #: 819
5 

The parties recommend a status conference after the Court issues a ruling on class 

certification. 

8. Suggestion as to type and timing of efforts at Alternative Dispute Resolution: 

Plaintiffs: Welcome the opportunity to schedule and conduct a mediation as-soon-aspossible. 

Defendant: Recommend conducting mediation late in the discovery period, after a decision 

on class action certification. 

9. Recommended date for a final pretrial conference: three weeks before trial 

10. Has a settlement demand been made? No. A response? N/A 

11. Other matters pertinent to the scheduling or management of this litigation: 

Plaintiffs have named the wrong entity as a defendant. Macy’s Inc. is a holding company 

and did not sell any sheets. Macy’s Retail Holdings, Inc. operates Macy’s retail stores in the 

eastern part of the United States (excluding Florida), including stores in St. Louis County, Missouri 

where Ms. Hill allegedly purchased the sheets at issue. Macy’s West Stores, Inc. operates the 

Macy’s store located at 8500 Beverly Boulevard in Los Angeles, California where Ms. Hawes 

allegedly purchased the sheets at issue. Macy’s Inc. is the wrong party and further is unlikely to 

have relevant information in its possession. The parties have discussed the filing of a stipulation 

to substitute parties. 

This the 22nd day of July, 2019. 

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 5 of 8 PAGEID #: 820
6 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs: 

/s/ Drew Legando 

Drew Legando (0084209) 

Jack Landskroner (0059227) 

LANDSKRONER GRIECO MERRIMAN, 

 LLC 

1360 W 9th Street, #200 

Cleveland, OH 44113 

Phone: (888) 570-3609 

Jack@lgmlegal.com

Bruce Steckler 

Stuart Cochran 

Kirstine Rogers 

STECKLER GRESHAM COCHRAN 

12720 Hillcrest Rd, Suite 1045 

Dallas, TX 75230 

Phone: (972) 387-4040 

bruce@steckler.com

stuart@stecklerlaw.com

krogers@stecklerlaw.com

Erica Mirabella 

MIRABELLA LAW LLC 

132 Boylston Street, 5th Floor 

Boston, MA 

Phone: (855) 505-5342 

erica@mirabellallc.com

Charles LaDuca 

David Black 

Brendan Thompson 

CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA LLP 

4725 Wisconsin Ave., NW , Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20016 

Phone: (202) 789-3960 

Facsimile: (202) 789-1813 

charles@cuneolaw.com

dblack@cuneolaw.com

Attorneys for Defendant: 

/s/ Beth A. Bryan 

Beth A. Bryan (Ohio Reg. 0082076) 

TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP 

425 Walnut Street, Suite 1800 

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 

Phone: (513) 381-2838 

Fax: (513) 381-0205 

bryan@taftlaw.com

Reid L. Phillips (admitted pro hac vice) 

NC State Bar No. 7968

Jennifer K. Van Zant (admitted pro hac vice) 

NC State Bar No. 21280 

Andrew L. Rodenbough (admitted pro hac vice) 

NC State Bar No. 46364

Ryan C. Fairchild (admitted pro hac vice) 

N.C. State Bar No. 47729

BROOKS, PIERCE, MCLENDON,

HUMPHREY & LEONARD, LLP 

230 North Elm Street 

2000 Renaissance Plaza 

Greensboro, NC 27401 

Telephone: (336) 373-8850 

Facsimile: (336) 378-1001 

rphillips@brookspierce.com

jvanzant@brookspierce.com

arodenbough@brookspierce.com 

rfairchild@brookspierce.com 

Attorneys for Defendant Macy’s Inc. 

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 6 of 8 PAGEID #: 821
7 

Michael McShane 

Clint Woods 

AUDET & PARTNERS, LLP 

711 Van Ness Avenue 

Suite 500 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

Phone: (415) 568-2555 

Facsimile: (415) 568-2556 

mmcshane@audetlaw.com

lkuang@audetlaw.com

Charles Schaffer 

LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN, LLP 

510 Walnut Street 

Suite 500 

Philadelphia, PA 19106 

Phone: (877) 882-1011 

Facsimile: (215) 592-4663 

cschaffer@lfsblaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 7 of 8 PAGEID #: 822
8 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing document was filed via the Court’s 

CM/ECF system, which will send electronic notification to all counsel of record. 

This the 22nd day of July, 2019. 

/s/ Beth A. Bryan 

Beth A. Bryan 

Case: 1:17-cv-00754-DRC Doc #: 60 Filed: 07/22/19 Page: 8 of 8 PAGEID #: 823