Wolf v. Lyft, Inc.

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-01441

ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Show Cause Response due by 3/25/2016. Joint Case Management Statement due by 3/25/2016. Initial Case Management Conference set for 4/1/2016 11:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 2nd Floor, Oakland. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 3/22/16.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 EMILY WOLF, Case No. 15-cv-01441-JSW Plaintiff, 8 ORDER CONTINUING CASE v. MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 9 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 10 LYFT, INC., Re: Docket No. 42 Defendant. 11 12 Northern District of California United States District Court 13 On January 21, 2016, after the Court had reviewed the parties' notice regarding the United 14 States Supreme Court's ruling in Cambpell-Ewald v. Gomez, __ U.S. __, 2016 WL 228345 (Jan. 15 20, 2016), the Court lifted the stay in this case, and it ordered the parties to appear for an initial 16 case management conference on March 25, 2016, at 11:00 a.m. (Docket No. 42.) The Court also 17 ordered that the parties' initial case management statement was due by no later than March 18, 18 2016. The parties have not complied with that deadline. 19 Accordingly, the Court CONTINUES the case management conference from March 25, 20 2016, to April 1, 2016. The parties shall file a joint case management statement by March 25, 21 2016. In addition to the subjects covered in the Court's form Joint Case Management Conference 22 Statement and Proposed Order, the parties shall address the following issues in the appropriate 23 sections: 24 What are the specific factual and legal issues in the litigation, and what is the support from 25 the pleadings or otherwise, as to the relevance of those issues? 26 What is plaintiff's best estimate as to the amount in controversy, including damages 27 reasonably sought by plaintiff in the case in chief, and by the defendant in any counterclaim, 28 excluding punitive damages? 1 What iss the parties'' best estimaate as to the aamount of atttorney's feees that will bbe incurred at a 2 eacch stage of th he litigation?? 3 What arre the speciffic subject matters m as to w which the paarties wish too conduct diiscovery and d 4 to what w specific issues is eaach item releevant? 5 What fo orms of discovery to the parties wishh to pursue. In respondiing to this quuestion, the 6 parrties should identify: i 7 the estim mated numb ber of interro ogatories andd/or requestss for admissiion, includinng subparts; 8 the estim mated numb ber of deposiitions, includding the totaal amount off time that the parties 9 pro opose spendiing on depossitions; and 10 how maany and whaat type of exp perts to the pparties conteemplate usinng. 11 Finally,, the parties are HEREBY ORDERE OW CAUSE why the Couurt should ED TO SHO 12 nott impose monetary sancttions in the amount a of $2250.00, per sside, for theiir failure to ccomply with h Northern District of California United States District Court 13 thee Court's deaadlines. Thee parties' response to thiss Order to Shhow Cause aalso shall bee due on 14 Maarch 25, 2016. 15 IT IS SO S ORDER RED. 16 Daated: March 22, 2 2016 17 18 JE EFFREY S. W WHITE 19 Unnited States D District Judgge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2