Kuhn v. L'Oreal USA S/D, Inc.
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:19-cv-04021
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Kuhn v. L’Oreal, Judge Gilliam approved extensions of discovery, motion, pretrial, and jury-trial deadlines because more time was needed.
The schedule of Linda Kuhn and the defendants was changed, extending discovery, the dispositive-motion hearing deadline, the pretrial conference, and the jury trial.
What happened
Kuhn v. L’Oreal USA S/D, Inc. is a personal-injury case in which Linda Kuhn alleges that a Matrix Biolage Dry Shampoo container or its contents exploded and severely injured her foot.
The parties said they needed more time for discovery, including records and about fifteen witness depositions. They also cited delays related to the COVID-19 pandemic and said additional discovery might help resolve the case.
Judge Haywood Gilliam approved the parties’ stipulated schedule changes. The order extended fact discovery to September 29, 2020; expert discovery to October 16, 2020; the dispositive-motion hearing deadline to December 3, 2020; the pretrial conference to March 9, 2021; and the jury trial to March 29, 2021. The order did not decide the underlying injury claims.
The detailed version
- Kuhn v. L'Oreal USA S/D, Inc. · No. 4:19-cv-04021
- Haywood Gilliam
- Apr. 27, 2020
Background
Linda Kuhn sued L’Oréal USA S/D, Inc., Matrix Essentials, LLC, Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc., and Does 1 to 100. The complaint alleges that a container of Matrix Biolage Dry Shampoo, its contents, or its component parts exploded near Kuhn and severely injured her foot. The stipulation states that the alleged injury occurred while Kuhn was visiting her daughter in San Francisco and that the product was purchased at an Ulta retail location in San Francisco.
The parties had exchanged initial disclosures and written discovery. They said they still needed to obtain third-party records and conduct approximately fifteen depositions, including depositions of witnesses believed to be in California, Ohio, Illinois, and New York. The parties also cited anticipated travel, health-care-provider availability, and other delays associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. A mediation held on January 31, 2020, did not settle the case, but the parties stated that additional discovery might help resolve it.
Requested Schedule Changes
The parties jointly asked to change several deadlines in the scheduling order:
- Fact discovery: from May 29, 2020, to September 29, 2020. - Expert discovery: from June 12, 2020, to October 16, 2020. - Deadline for hearings on dispositive motions: from July 30, 2020, to December 3, 2020, at 2:00 p.m. - Pretrial conference: from November 10, 2020, to March 9, 2021, at 3:00 p.m. - Five-day jury trial: from November 30, 2020, to March 29, 2021, at 8:30 a.m.
Disposition
The court entered the proposed order pursuant to the parties’ stipulation: “IT IS SO ORDERED.” Judge Haywood Gilliam therefore approved the requested extensions and continuances. This was a scheduling order; it did not rule on liability, the alleged product defect, or any other underlying claim.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.