Tyler Hardy & Jermine Santiago v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
This text of Tyler Hardy & Jermine Santiago v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (Tyler Hardy & Jermine Santiago v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
6 TYLER HARDY & JERMINE SANTIAGO, 7 Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:25-cv-00072-RSM 8 v. JOINT STIPULATED MOTION AND 9 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMBILE ORDER TO EXTEND CLASS INSURANCE COMPANY, CERTIFICATION DEADLINES 10 Defendant. 11
12 In accordance with LCR 16(b)(6), Plaintiffs Tyler Hardy and Jermine Santiago 13 (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Defendant” or 14 “State Farm”) (collectively, the “Parties”) hereby jointly move to extend class certification 15 deadlines in this matter as previously set by the Court (ECF No. 23) by 90 days. The Parties agree 16 that good cause exists for this continuance and modification of the scheduling order. 17 STANDARD 18 Under Local Civil Rule 16(b)(6), a schedule may be modified by the Court with its consent 19 and “for good cause.” Good cause is assessed by considering “(1) the party seeking the 20 continuance’s diligence in preparing for trial; (2) the need for a continuance; (3) inconvenience to 21 the opposing party, the witnesses, and the Court; and (4) the hardship a denial would cause.” 22 Rollins v. Traylor Bros Inc., 2017 WL 2215778, at *1 (W.D. Wash. May 19, 2017) (citing United 23 24 1 States v. 2.61 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in Mariposa Cnty., State of Cal., 791 F.2d 2 666, 670 (9th Cir. 1985)). 3 DISCUSSION 4 On April 9, 2025, the Court issued a Rule 16(b) and Rule 23(d)(2) Scheduling Order
5 Regarding Class Certification Motion (“Order”). ECF No. 23. That Order set deadlines for the end 6 of class certification, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify Class, State Farm’s opposition to that motion, 7 and Plaintiffs’ reply. Id. The Parties jointly request that these deadlines be extended 90 days. This 8 is the first request for an extension of the Scheduling Order deadlines in this matter. 9 While each Party has been diligently engaging in discovery, the Parties submit that good 10 cause exists for this extension. First, counsel for the Parties have several pre-existing commitments 11 and pre-booked travel in separate litigation, and pre-booked holiday travel that make compliance 12 with the current deadlines impracticable. Second, Plaintiffs’ counsel has a trial in this district 13 starting on December 1, 2025, in Ngethpharat v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 2:20-cv- 14 00454-MJP. That trial is expected to take 15 days and will significantly impact Plaintiffs’ counsel’s
15 ability to comply with the existing deadlines. An additional 90 days will allow the Parties to 16 complete discovery and briefing in a thorough and efficient manner. The Parties respectfully 17 submit that denial of an extension would cause significant hardship, as they will not have sufficient 18 time to comply with the Scheduling Order deadlines. 19 AMENDED DEADLINES REQUESTED 20 For the reasons above, the Parties propose the following amended schedule: 21 EVENT CURRENT DATE PROPOSED DATE 22 Class certification discovery cut-off 12/3/2025 3/3/2026 Deadline for Plaintiffs to file 1/15/2026 4/15/2026 23 Motion to Certify Class 24 1 Opposition to Motion to Certify 4/15/2026 7/14/2026 Class 2 Reply in Support of Motion to 6/26/2026 9/24/2026 3 Certify Class Hearing on Motion to Certify Class To be set by the Court after briefing completed 4
5 Respectfully submitted, this 17th day of October, 2025. 6 The undersigned counsel for State Farm, who is submitting this motion, certifies that it 7 contains 914 words, in compliance with the Local Rules. 8 /s/ Stephen M. Hansen /s/Steve Jensen Stephen M. Hanson, WSBA #15642 Steve Jensen, WSBA #26495 9 Benjamin Roesch, WSBA #39960 STEPHEN M. HANSEN, P.S. 10 3800 Bridgeport Way, Ste. A, PMB 5 JENSEN MORSE BAKER PLLC University Place, Washington 98466 520 Pike Street, Suite 2375 11 (253) 302-5955 Seattle, WA 98101 Steve@stephenmhansenlaw.com (206) 682-1644 12 steve.jensen@jmblawyers.com Scott P. Nealey (admitted pro hac vice) benjamin.roesch@jmblawyers.com 13 LAW OFFICE OF SCOTT P. NEALEY 201 Spear Street, Suite 1100 David Carpenter (admitted pro hac vice) 14 San Francisco, CA 94105 Tiffany Powers (admitted pro hac vice) (415) 231-5311 Melissa Quintana (admitted pro hac vice) 15 snealey@nealeylaw.com ALSTON & BIRD LLP 1201 W. Peachtree Street 16 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Tyler Hardy and Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Jermine Santiago (404) 881-7000 17 David.Carpenter@alston.com Tiffany.Powers@alston.com 18 Melissa.Quintana@alston.com
19 Attorneys for Defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company 20
22 23 24 1 ORDER
2 Pursuant to the joint stipulated motion of the Parties, and for good cause shown, the case 3 deadlines in ECF No. 23 are extended as follows: 4 EVENT DATE 5 Class certification discovery cut-off 3/3/2026 Deadline for Plaintiffs to file 4/15/2026 6 Motion to Certify Class 7 Opposition to Motion to Certify 7/14/2026 Class 8 Reply in Support of Motion to 9/24/2026 Certify Class 9 Hearing on Motion to Certify Class To be set by the Court 10 after briefing completed
IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of October , 2025. 12
13 A 14
15 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17
18 19 20
21 22 23 24
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Tyler Hardy & Jermine Santiago v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tyler-hardy-jermine-santiago-v-state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-wawd-2025.