Jimenez
Jimenez v. Hyatt Corporation
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FLOR JIMENEZ, individually and No. 2:23-cv-03028-TLN-KJN on behalf of all others 12 similarly situated, 13 Plaintiff, AMENDED PRETRIAL SCHEDULING
ORDER
14 v. 15 HYATT CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, 16 Defendant. 17 18 After reviewing the parties’ Joint Statement, the Court 19 hereby amends the Pretrial Scheduling Order. 20 I. SERVICE OF PROCESS 21 All named Defendants have been served and no further service 22 is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been 23 shown. 24 II. ADDITIONAL PARTIES/AMENDMENTS/PLEADINGS 25 No joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings is 26 permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown. 27 /// 28 /// 1 III. JURISDICTION/VENUE 2 Jurisdiction is predicated upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332(d)(2)(A). 3 Jurisdiction and venue are not contested. 4 5 PHASE I - CLASS CERTIFICATION 6 7 IV. DISCOVERY 8 The Court finds that bifurcation is necessary in order to 9 best determine if…