From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Milano v. Interstate Battery Sys. of America, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Jan 30, 2012
Case No. C 10-02125 CW (N.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. C 10-02125 CW

01-30-2012

DENO MILANO, Plaintiff, v. INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM OF AMERICA, INC.; INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendants.

Eric H. Gibbs (State Bar No. 178658) David Stein (State Bar No. 257465) GIRARD GIBBS LLP Class Counsel Robert A. Mittelstaedt (State Bar No. 60359) Craig E. Stewart (State Bar No. 129530) Jerome R. Doak (admitted pro hac vice) JONES DAY Attorneys for Defendants Interstate Battery System of America, Inc., and Interstate Battery System International, Inc.


Eric H. Gibbs (State Bar No. 178658)

David Stein (State Bar No. 257465)

GIRARD GIBBS LLP

Class Counsel

Robert A. Mittelstaedt (State Bar No. 60359)

Craig E. Stewart (State Bar No. 129530)

Jerome R. Doak (admitted pro hac vice)

JONES DAY

Attorneys for Defendants Interstate Battery System of

America, Inc., and Interstate Battery System International, Inc.

JOINT STATUS REPORT, STIPULATION, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING DATES

JOINT STATUS REPORT

By stipulation dated December 21, 2011, (Doc. #63), the parties informed the Court that new developments led the parties to reconsider the class action settlement agreement that the Court preliminarily approved on December 1, 2011. (Doc. #62.) The Court entered an Order extending all existing deadlines by 60 days and ordering this Joint Status Report. (Doc. #63.)

Since that time, the parties have worked together to agree on an new approach to this class action settlement. The parties are in the final stage of reducing the terms of this new approach to writing in the Amended Settlement Agreement; the parties recognize that the new settlement approach will need to be preliminarily approved by the Court.

While the new approach is substantially similar to the original settlement agreement previously approved by this Court, it does have some new aspects, including a broader class definition that provides the settlement benefits to more Interstate Batteries' customers over a longer period of time.

The parties propose that the Court set a deadline of February 8, 2012, for the filing of the Amended Settlement Agreement and renewed motion for preliminary approval. The parties further propose that a hearing on that motion be scheduled for February 23, 2012, or such later date and time as is convenient for the Court.

STIPULATION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and through the undersigned attorneys for Plaintiff Deno Milano and Defendants Interstate Battery System of America, Inc., and Interstate Battery System International, Inc., subject to the Court's approval, that:

1. All deadlines currently in place shall be terminated.
2. The fairness hearing currently scheduled for March 8, 2012, shall be taken off calendar.
3. Plaintiff shall file the Amended Settlement Agreement and the preliminary approval papers no later than February 8, 2012.
4. A hearing on the renewed motion for preliminary approval shall be set for February 23, 2012, at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

GIRARD GIBBS LLP

By: _________________

Eric H. Gibbs

David Stein

Class Counsel

JONES DAY

By: _________________

Jerome R. Doak

Robert A. Mittelstaedt

Craig E. Stewart

Attorneys for Defendants

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED. The hearing on the renewed motion for preliminary approval shall be set for March 8, 2012, at 2:00 p.m.

_________________

Judge Claudia Wilken

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Milano v. Interstate Battery Sys. of America, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Jan 30, 2012
Case No. C 10-02125 CW (N.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2012)
Case details for

Milano v. Interstate Battery Sys. of America, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DENO MILANO, Plaintiff, v. INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM OF AMERICA, INC.;…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

Date published: Jan 30, 2012

Citations

Case No. C 10-02125 CW (N.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2012)