Case No. 1:12-CV-01868-AWI-DLB.

LETICIA CEJA-CORONA; MARGARITA RUBIO ARMENTA on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CVS PHARMACY, INC., a corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division.

November 14, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. DAVID H. YEREMIAN , HUGO E. GAMEZ , Attorneys for Plaintiffs LETICIA CEJA-CORONA, and MARGARITA RUBIO ARMENTA on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated.

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Jody Landry , Attorneys for Defendant CVS Pharmacy, Inc.


STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

COME NOW Plaintiffs Leticia Ceja-Corona ("Ceja-Corona"), and Margarita Rubio Armenta ("Armenta") (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs"), and Defendant CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (collectively hereinafter the "Parties"), through their respective counsel of record, and respectfully submit this Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order.

The Parties hereby stipulate and agree:

1. WHEREAS on April 8, 2013, the Court issued a scheduling order in this action (ECF No. 14) setting the deadline for filing a motion for class certification on February 28, 2014. The Court extended this deadline to August 25, 2014 by order issued on January 9, 2014. (ECF No. 38.) 2. WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of a class action settlement on July 30, 2014 (ECF No. 48); 3. WHEREAS the hearing on Plaintiff's motion took place on September 10, 2014 4. WHEREAS the Court ordered on September 11, 2014, that Plaintiffs file an amended motion and supporting documents addressing the issues outlined in the order on or before October 15, 2014 (which was later extended to October 22, 2014 by stipulation); 5. WHEREAS Plaintiffs complied with the Court's order and filed the amended documents (ECF No. 55) and on a continued hearing on the motion for preliminary approval took place on Wednesday, October 29, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 9 before United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone; 6. WHEREAS based on the findings and recommendations issued by Magistrate Judge Boone that the motion be denied (ECF No. 59) Plaintiffs withdrew their motion and for preliminary approval in order to meet and confer with Defendants and revise the settlement terms according to the findings and recommendations issued by Magistrate Judge Boone (ECF No. 60); 7. WHEREAS the parties are in the process of revising the settlement terms to address the issues raised by the Court's Order (ECF No. 59) and expect to have a new stipulation of settlement executed by late November and thereafter wish to file a new motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement; 8. Therefore the parties hereby stipulate to continue Plaintiffs' deadline to file its motion for preliminary approval through December 12, 2014. 9. There is good cause to grant this stipulation: the parties have invested tremendous resources in litigating and settling the class action claims in this matter which, if approved, will result in real value for class members. The parties are meeting and conferring in order to further revise the terms of settlement to comply with Magistrate Judge Boone's Findings and Recommendations and expect to do so as follows: a. the parties expect to agree to exclude the release of reporting time pay claims without altering the monetary terms of the settlement; and, b. the parties expect to agree to put the Labor & Workforce Development Agency on notice of the monetary allocation for the PAGA claim. 10. No party will be prejudiced by the granting of this stipulation.



The Parties having stipulated to the foregoing, and GOOD CAUSE appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The dates indicated below shall be the new deadlines in this matter: a. Deadline to file motion for preliminary approval of a class action settlement, December 12, 2014; b. The hearing on any motion for preliminary approval shall be set by the parties in accordance with the Local Rules.



1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases