Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Runyan v. Clemons

United States District Court, W.D. Washington

October 8, 2019

BRUCE RUNYAN, ROBERT SAMPSON, and JONN CALEB GOSS on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the MTC Transportation 401k Plan, Plaintiffs,
v.
MARK CLEMONS d/b/a MTC TRANSPORTATION, a sole proprietorship, HI PRO INC., a California corporation, and MARK CLEMONS individually and/or the marital community composed of MARK CLEMONS and JANE DOE CLEMONS, Defendants.

          TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC, Toby J. Marshall, Erika L. Nusser, Hardeep S. Rekhi, Gregory A. Wolk, REKHI & WOLK, P.S. Attorneys for plaintiffs.

          CORR CRONIN, LLP, Lawrence R. Cock, Jack M. Lovejoy, Attorneys for defendants.

          STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DEADLINES

          Marsha J. Pechman United States District Judge.

         I. STIPULATION

         The parties hereby stipulate and request the Court issue an Order extending the export report and rebuttal expert report deadlines, as well as the discovery deadline as it relates to depositions of experts only. As set forth more fully below, the parties have been working diligently in discovery, but are still working to obtain data from a third-party for purposes of completing expert reports.

         1. The plaintiffs in this matter challenge defendants' employment practices under Washington's wage and hour laws, and defendants have answered.

         2. The parties have engaged in significant discovery. Plaintiffs have propounded one set of discovery requests on each of the defendants, which have been answered. Defendants have likewise propounded discovery requests on plaintiffs, to which plaintiffs have responded. In addition, plaintiffs have conducted two Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) depositions and taken the individual deposition of defendant Mark Clemons. Defendants have also deposed each of the plaintiffs.

         3. During the course of discovery, the parties also worked to establish a protocol for defendants to use a technology assisted review for production of defendants' electronically stored information. To date, defendants have produced more than 250, 000 pages of documents, including hundreds of spreadsheets containing the daily hours worked by proposed class members during the class period. Those spreadsheets, however, do not have the rates of pay for proposed class members, which is necessary to calculate damages.

         4. Defendants provided the data available to them pertaining to the rates of pay, dates of payment, and pay received by proposed class members. However, the data produced by defendants is not in a format that experts can readily sort and pair with the data regarding hours worked by proposed class members. Defendants attempted to locate the payroll data in a more usable format and attempted to work with their payroll vendor to obtain that data but were unable to do so. Plaintiffs have therefore subpoenaed defendants' payroll vendor to obtain more usable data.

         5. The parties have diligently sought to obtain the necessary data to prepare expert reports. Given the volume of data and the fact that defendants have been unable to locate the necessary data in a readily-usable format, however, the parties need additional time to obtain the data.

         6. The parties are unable to finalize their expert reports without the missing pay data from defendants' payroll vendor. The parties are also therefore unable to complete depositions of experts without completed reports.

         7. The parties' request to extend the deadlines to exchange expert reports and rebuttal expert reports, and to allow additional time past the discovery cutoff to complete depositions relating to expert reports will not impact any other deadlines in the case.

         8. Thus, good cause exists to extend the following deadlines:

Event

Current Deadline

Requested Extension

Exchange of expert witness reports

10/15/2019

12/17/2019

Rebuttal expert reports

None

1/10/2020

Discovery cut-off

12/13/2019

1/24/2020 - For depositions relating to expert reports only


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.