Case: Romero v. Securus Technologies, Inc.

3:16-cv-01283 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California

Filed Date: May 27, 2016

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 27, 2016, former California state prisoners filed this class action lawsuit against Securus Technologies (a prison phone service provider) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District Court of California. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs sought class action certification, declaratory and injunctive relief, and monetary damages. The complaint asserted that Securus had recorded prisoners’ phone calls in violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, which allowe…

On May 27, 2016, former California state prisoners filed this class action lawsuit against Securus Technologies (a prison phone service provider) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District Court of California. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs sought class action certification, declaratory and injunctive relief, and monetary damages. The complaint asserted that Securus had recorded prisoners’ phone calls in violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, which allowed for statutory damages of up to $5,000 for every unlawfully recorded call, and also alleged negligence.

Specifically, the complaint alleged that Securus recorded confidential attorney-client phone calls without permission of all parties and that Securus shared recordings with law enforcement personnel. Based on the Intercept's article that 70 million phone call recordings were made by Securus, the plaintiffs estimated that half a million calls between public defenders and clients were unlawfully recorded each year.

The putative class was specified as all persons in California whose conversations were eavesdropped on or recorded by Securus from June 1, 2008 to May 27, 2016, without permission and while in the custody of law enforcement officers or agencies and their attorneys.

This case was assigned to Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. On July 5, 2016, the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, claiming that plaintiffs lacked standing because their phone calls were not recorded and they were no longer in prison.

The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on July 26, 2016, which included additional causes of action, such as fraudulent concealment/intentional omission of material facts, fraud and intentional misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and conversion. The defendant moved to dismiss the amended complaint on August 26, 2016.

On October 24, 2016, Judge Miller granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion. The court dismissed the plaintiffs’ conversion claim without leave to amend and dismissed the fraudulent misrepresentation claim with leave to amend. The court denied the remainder of the defendant’s motion. 2016 WL 6157953. The plaintiffs timely amended the fourth cause of action in their second amended complaint on November 7, 2016. The defendant moved to dismiss the second amended complaint on November 25, 2016.

On January 26, 2017, Judge Miller granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)’s particularity requirements and California law in alleging misrepresentations. 2017 WL 385743.

On February 8, 2017, the plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint to satisfy the fraud claim under Rule 9(b). The defendant again moved to dismiss, and on March 29, 2017, Judge Miller granted the motion without leave to amend, finding that the plaintiffs had failed to adequately plead fraud. 2017 WL 1166365.

On October 10, 2017, the plaintiffs filed a motion to certify a class comprised of other prison detainees whose calls had allegedly been recorded by the defendant, which the plaintiffs asserted comprised over 120 individuals. On the same day, the plaintiffs requested that documents in this case be sealed. Judge Miller granted the motion to seal on November 7.

On April 12, 2018, Judge Miller denied the plaintiffs’ motion to certify class without prejudice because the plaintiffs had failed to identify an ascertainable and manageable class. 2018 WL 1782926. The plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment on May 22, and filed a renewed motion to certify a class on July 11, 2018, and Judge Miller ordered the parties to meet and confer to create a joint discovery plan on August 7, 2018. On August 17, 2018, the court granted the parties’ motion to stay its ruling on the renewed motion to certify class pending the result of the parties’ attempt to secure private mediation. On November 21, 2018, Judge Miller denied the plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment and granted in part the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, certifying a class consisting of every person in the physical custody of a law enforcement officer in California (and their attorneys) who had been eavesdropped on or recorded by the defendant. 331 F.R.D. 391.

The plaintiffs petitioned for leave to appeal the denial of the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment to the Ninth Circuit. This petition was denied. 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 5728. However, the Ninth Circuit granted the defendant’s petition for leave to appeal the district court’s class certification decision. 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 6334. On April 17, 2019, Judge Miller granted the defendant's motion to stay the case pending resolution of the defendant's appeal before the Ninth Circuit. 383 F. Supp. 3d 1069.

Following the Ninth Circuit's grant of review of Securus' petition, the Ninth Circuit appointed a mediator. After multiple status conferences with the mediator, a settlement agreement was reached between the parties. On March 12, 2020, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal without prejudice pending approval of the settlement by the district court.

In its June 16, 2020 order preliminarily approving the parties' settlement agreement, the court approved the following class definition:

"Every person who was a party to any portion of a conversation between a person who was in the physical custody of a law enforcement officer or other public officer in California, and that person's attorney, on a telephone number designated or requested not to be recorded, any portion of which was eavesdropped on or recorded by Defendant Securus Technologies, Inc. by means of an electronic device during the period July 10, 2008 through June 16, 2020." 2020 WL 6799401.

Under the settlement agreement, Securus agreed to make available to its customers a no-cost “private call” option for approved numbers, implement message prompts advising callers whether the call will be recorded, and post on its website information about designating numbers as approved. The defendant also agreed to provide plaintiff's counsel with bi-annual compliance declarations and to pay attorneys' fees and costs. The court awarded $870,000 in attorneys' fees and costs, as well as $10,000 to each of the three named plaintiffs as a service award. Final judgment in the suit was entered on November 19, 2020.

The court retained jurisdiction for purposes of enforcing the parties’ settlement agreement.

Summary Authors

Susie Choi (2/1/2017)

Lisa Limb (3/23/2018)

Elizabeth Helpling (11/19/2019)

Rachel Harrington (4/15/2021)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4193742/parties/romero-v-securus-technologies-inc/


Judge(s)

Dembin, Mitchell D (California)

Miller, Jeffrey T. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Belsey, Adam (California)

Gallucci, Kas L (California)

Houchin, Michael (California)

Marron, Ronald (California)

Raux, Geoffrey M. (Massachusetts)

Resendes, Beatrice Skye (California)

Richards, William Bradford Jr. (California)

Ridley, Eileen Regina (California)

Judge(s)

Dembin, Mitchell D (California)

Miller, Jeffrey T. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Belsey, Adam (California)

Gallucci, Kas L (California)

Houchin, Michael (California)

Marron, Ronald (California)

Raux, Geoffrey M. (Massachusetts)

Resendes, Beatrice Skye (California)

Richards, William Bradford Jr. (California)

Ridley, Eileen Regina (California)

Teel, Robert (Washington)

Waxman, J. Mark (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Fox, Adam R. (California)

Other Attorney(s)

Rodriguez, Pedro (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

Nov. 19, 2020 Docket
1

Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief Pursuant to California Penal Code §636 and Based on Negligence

May 27, 2016 Complaint
8

First Amended Complaint

July 26, 2016 Complaint
21

Order Granting In Part And Denying In Part Defendant's Motion to Dismiss And Denying Defendant's Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations

216 F.Supp.3d 1078, 2016 WL 6157953

Oct. 24, 2016 Order/Opinion
22

Second Amended Complaint

Nov. 7, 2016 Complaint
29

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint

2017 WL 385743

Jan. 26, 2017 Order/Opinion
30

Third Amended Complaint

Feb. 8, 2017 Complaint
37

Order Granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Portions of Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint

Romero v. Securus Technologies INC

2017 WL 1166365

March 29, 2017 Order/Opinion
42

Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Expedite Discovery and for a Preservation Order

Romero v. Securus Technologies INC

2017 WL 2869727

April 17, 2017 Order/Opinion
66

Order on Joint Motion for Determination of Discovery Dispute Regarding Defendant's Responses to Written Discovery

Romero v. Securus Technologies INC

2017 WL 4621223

Oct. 16, 2017 Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4193742/romero-v-securus-technologies-inc/

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Securus Technologies, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0974-9103532.), filed by Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:16-cv-1283-JM-MDD. Judge Jeffrey T. Miller and Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin are assigned to the case. (Marron, Ronald)(fth) (Attachment 1 replaced on 5/27/2016) (fth). (jao). (Entered: 05/27/2016)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

May 27, 2016 RECAP
2

Summons Issued. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should print this summons and serve it in accordance with Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P and LR 4.1. (fth)(jao). (Entered: 05/27/2016)

May 27, 2016 PACER
3

NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by Securus Technologies, Inc. (Fox, Adam)(rlu). (Entered: 07/05/2016)

July 5, 2016 PACER
4

MOTION to Dismiss by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Ian Jones in Supprot of Securus's Motion to Dismiss)(Fox, Adam)Attorney Adam R Fox added to party Securus Technologies, Inc.(pty:dft) (rlu). (Entered: 07/05/2016)

July 5, 2016 PACER
5

MOTION to Strike 4 MOTION to Dismiss by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix of Electronic Authorities Cited in Support of Securus's Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike with Exhibits 1-10, # 2 Appendix of Electronic Authorities Cited in Support of Securus's Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike with Exhibits 11-20)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 07/05/2016)

July 5, 2016 PACER
6

Minute Order by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller: Motion Hearing as to 5 MOTION to Strike, 4 MOTION to Dismiss, set for 8/22/2016 is vacated and continued to 9/12/2016 10:00 AM in Courtroom 5D before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller (no document attached) (gac) (Entered: 07/11/2016)

July 11, 2016 PACER
7

NOTICE of Appearance by Robert Teel on behalf of Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert)Attorney Robert Teel added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney Robert Teel added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (rlu). (Entered: 07/14/2016)

July 14, 2016 PACER
8

AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants, filed by Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno, Kenneth Elliott. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service) (Teel, Robert) (dls). (Entered: 07/26/2016)

1 Proof of Service

View on PACER

July 26, 2016 RECAP
9

Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 8 Amended Complaint by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Fox, Adam) qc email re proposed order on 8/5/2016 (rlu). (Entered: 08/04/2016)

Aug. 4, 2016 PACER
10

ORDER Granting 9 Joint Motion to Extend Defendant's Time to Respond to Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint. Defendant must answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' first amended complaint by 8/26/2016. Defendant's motions to dismiss and strike (Doc. Nos. 4 and 5 ) are denied as moot in light of Plaintiffs' first amended complaint. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 8/8/2016. (rlu) (Entered: 08/08/2016)

Aug. 8, 2016 PACER
11

MOTION to Dismiss by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Ian Jones in support of Motion to Dismiss, # 2 Request for Judicial Notice in support of Motion to Dismiss)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 08/26/2016)

1 Declaration of Ian Jones in support of Motion to Dismiss

View on PACER

2 Request for Judicial Notice in support of Motion to Dismiss

View on PACER

Aug. 26, 2016 PACER
12

MOTION to Strike by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix in support of Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 08/26/2016)

Aug. 26, 2016 PACER
13

Joint MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Marron, Ronald)Attorney Ronald Marron added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla) (rlu). (Entered: 09/15/2016)

Sept. 15, 2016 PACER
14

ORDER granting 13 Motion for Leave to Exceed the Page Limitation. The Court grants leave to file (1) a 30-page memorandum by Plaintiff in opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (Defendants Motion); and (2) a 13-page reply memorandum by Defendant in support of Defendants Motion. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 9/15/2016. (acc) (Entered: 09/15/2016)

Sept. 15, 2016 PACER
15

NOTICE of Appearance by Beatrice Skye Resendes on behalf of Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Resendes, Beatrice)Attorney Beatrice Skye Resendes added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla), Attorney Beatrice Skye Resendes added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney Beatrice Skye Resendes added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (rlu). (Entered: 09/19/2016)

Sept. 19, 2016 PACER
16

RESPONSE in Opposition re 12 MOTION to Strike filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Resendes, Beatrice) (rlu). (Entered: 09/19/2016)

Sept. 19, 2016 PACER
17

RESPONSE in Opposition re 11 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Request for Judicial Notice, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Declaration of Christina Rivas, # 8 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (rlu). (Entered: 09/19/2016)

Sept. 19, 2016 PACER
18

REPLY to Response to Motion re 11 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Ian Jones, # 2 Opposition to Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 09/26/2016)

Sept. 26, 2016 PACER
19

REPLY to Response to Motion re 12 MOTION to Strike filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Appendix of Electronic Authorities)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 09/26/2016)

Sept. 26, 2016 PACER
20

Minute Order by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller: Submitting, 12 MOTION to Strike, 11 MOTION to Dismiss. Motion Hearing set for 10/3/2016 10:00 AM before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller is vacated. Written order to follow. (no document attached) (gac) (Entered: 09/27/2016)

Sept. 27, 2016 PACER
21

ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part Defendant's 11 Motion to Dismiss and Denying Defendant's 12 Motion to Strike Class Allegations. The court dismisses, with leave to amend, Plaintiffs' Fourth Cause of Action (Fraud and Intentional Misrepresentation). The court dismisses, without leave to amend, Plaintiffs' Seventh Cause of Action (Conversion). The court denies the remainder of Defendant's motion to dismiss, and the court denies Defendant's motion to strike. If Plaintiffs wish to file a second amended complaint to address their claim for intentional misrepresentation, they must do so within fourteen days of the entry of this order. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 10/24/2016. (rlu) (Entered: 10/24/2016)

Oct. 24, 2016 RECAP
22

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Securus Technologies, Inc., filed by Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno, Kenneth Elliott. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service) (Teel, Robert) (kas). (Entered: 11/07/2016)

1 Proof of Service

View on PACER

Nov. 7, 2016 RECAP
23

MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Appendix of Electronic Authorities)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 11/25/2016)

Nov. 25, 2016 PACER
24

Notice to Withdraw as Attorney by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Resendes, Beatrice) (rlu). Modified on 1/3/2017 to change event type (rlu). (Entered: 12/29/2016)

Dec. 29, 2016 PACER
25

NOTICE of Appearance by William Bradford Richards, Jr on behalf of Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Richards, William)Attorney William Bradford Richards, Jr added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla), Attorney William Bradford Richards, Jr added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney William Bradford Richards, Jr added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (fth). (Entered: 01/06/2017)

Jan. 6, 2017 PACER
26

RESPONSE in Opposition re 23 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Request for Judicial Notice, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (fth). (Entered: 01/09/2017)

Jan. 9, 2017 PACER
27

Minute Order by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller: Submitting 23 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint. Motion Hearing set for 1/23/2017 10:00 AM before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller is vacated. Written order to follow. (no document attached) (gac) (Entered: 01/13/2017)

Jan. 13, 2017 PACER
28

REPLY - Other re 23 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Opposition to Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice, # 2 Appendix in Support of Defendant Securus Technologies, Inc.'s Reply)(Mork, Marisol) (Entered: 01/13/2017)

Jan. 13, 2017 PACER
29

ORDER Granting in part and Denying in Part Defendant's 23 Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint. The court denies Defendant's motion as to the 5/29/2012, "Customer Integrity Pledge" and 11/13/2015, press release, and grants Defendant's motion as to any information conveyed to the Sheriff. If Plaintiff can satisfy Rule 9(b) and California law in alleging specific misrepresentations that Defendant made to the Sheriff, it may file an amended complaint within fourteen days of this order. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 1/26/2017. (rlu) (Entered: 01/27/2017)

Jan. 26, 2017 RECAP
30

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand Third Amended Complaint against All Defendants, filed by Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno, Kenneth Elliott. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service) (Teel, Robert) (rlu). (Entered: 02/08/2017)

1 Proof of Service

View on PACER

Feb. 8, 2017 RECAP
31

MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix of Electronic Authorities)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 02/22/2017)

1 Appendix of Electronic Authorities

View on PACER

Feb. 22, 2017 RECAP
32

Ex Parte MOTION for Discovery (Expedited) and Application for Order to Preserve and Restore Evidence by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities In Support of Ex Parte Application for Order to Expedite Discovery and Preserve and Restore Evidence, # 2 Declaration of Robert Teel, # 3 Exhibit 1 to Teel Decl., # 4 Exhibit 2 to Teel Decl., # 5 Request for Judicial Notice In Support of Application, # 6 Exhibit 1, # 7 Exhibit 2, # 8 Exhibit 3, # 9 Exhibit 4, # 10 Exhibit 5, # 11 Exhibit 6, # 12 Exhibit 7, # 13 Exhibit 8, # 14 Exhibit 9, # 15 Exhibit 10, # 16 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (rlu). (Entered: 03/10/2017)

March 10, 2017 PACER
33

RESPONSE in Opposition re 31 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert)(acc). (Entered: 03/17/2017)

March 17, 2017 PACER
34

ORDER Setting Briefing Schedule : On 3/10/2017 Plaintiffs filed an Ex Parte Application for Expedited Discovery. 32 Accordingly, Responses are due by 3/31/2017 and Replies are due by 4/7/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 03/19/2017.(no document attached) (atk) (Entered: 03/19/2017)

March 19, 2017 PACER
35

Minute Order by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller: Submitting, 31 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint. Motion Hearing set for 4/3/2017 10:00 AM before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller is vacated. Written order to follow. (no document attached) (gac) (Entered: 03/27/2017)

March 27, 2017 PACER
36

REPLY - Other re 31 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix of Electronic Authorities Cited in the Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 03/27/2017)

March 27, 2017 PACER
37

ORDER Granting Defendant's 31 Motion to Dismiss Portions of Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint. As Plaintiffs have had multiple attempts to adequately plead fraud based on information conveyed to the Sheriff and have not been able to do so, the court's order is without leave to amend. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 3/29/2017. (rlu) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

March 29, 2017 RECAP
38

RESPONSE in Opposition re 32 Ex Parte MOTION for Discovery (Expedited) and Application for Order to Preserve and Restore Evidence filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Ian Jones, # 2 Appendix of Electronic Authorities)(Fox, Adam) (fth). (Entered: 03/31/2017)

March 31, 2017 PACER
39

REPLY - Other re 32 Ex Parte MOTION for Discovery (Expedited) and Application for Order to Preserve and Restore Evidence, 38 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Jeffrey Hansen, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Request for Judicial Notice, # 4 Exhibit 1, # 5 Exhibit 2, # 6 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (rlu). (Entered: 04/07/2017)

April 7, 2017 PACER
40

OBJECTION by Securus Technologies, Inc. re 39 Reply - Other, . (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Appendix of Electronic Authorities)(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 04/11/2017)

April 11, 2017 PACER
41

ANSWER to 30 Amended Complaint by Securus Technologies, Inc..(Fox, Adam) (rlu). (Entered: 04/12/2017)

April 12, 2017 PACER
42

ORDER denying 32 Plaintiffs' Ex Parte MOTION for Discovery (Expedited) and Application for Order to Preserve and Restore Evidence. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 4/17/2017. (Dembin, Mitchell) (Entered: 04/17/2017)

April 17, 2017 RECAP
43

NOTICE AND ORDER for Telephonic Early Neutral Evaluation Conference: Early Neutral Evaluation set for 5/26/2017 at 2:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin. Joint Discovery Plan due 5/19/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 4/28/2017.(rlu) Modified on 5/23/2017 (dls). (Entered: 04/28/2017)

April 28, 2017 PACER
44

NOTICE of Teleconference Information Sheet for the Telephonic ENE/CMC set for May 26, 2017 at 2:30PM. (atk) (Entered: 05/23/2017)

May 23, 2017 PACER
45

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin: A telephonic Early Neutral Evaluation/Case Management Conference was held on 5/26/2017. No settlement. Order to follow.(Plaintiff Attorney Robert Teel). (Defendant Attorney Adam Fox, Gretchen Ramos). (no document attached) (atk) (Entered: 05/26/2017)

May 26, 2017 PACER
46

Case Management Order Regulating Discovery through Filing of Class Certification Motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 5/30/2017. (fth) (Entered: 05/30/2017)

May 30, 2017 PACER
47

NOTICE of Appearance by Adam Belsey on behalf of Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Belsey, Adam)Attorney Adam Belsey added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla), Attorney Adam Belsey added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney Adam Belsey added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (rlu). (Entered: 06/28/2017)

June 28, 2017 PACER
48

MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney William B. Richards by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Marron, Ronald) (rlu). (Entered: 07/03/2017)

July 3, 2017 PACER
49

ORDER Granting Plaintiffs' 48 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney William Bradford Richards, Jr. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 7/5/2017. (rlu) (Entered: 07/05/2017)

July 5, 2017 PACER
50

Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller Rejecting Document: Notice of Motion and Motion to Intervene, from Pedro Rodriguez. Non-compliance with local rule(s), Civ. L. Rule 7.1: Lacking memorandum of points and authorities in support as a separate document, OTHER: Civ.L. Rule 5.1 - Improper format; illegible, Rejected document was returned to the filer. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 7/10/2017.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rlu) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/10/2017: # 1 Rejected Document) (rlu). (Entered: 07/10/2017)

July 10, 2017 PACER
51

MOTION for Relief under Rule 60(b), by Pedro Rodriguez. (jpp) (Entered: 08/01/2017)

Aug. 1, 2017 PACER
52

ORDER granting 51 Non-Party Pedro Rodriguez's Motion for reconsideration of Court's rejection of his motion to intervene. The court accepts for filing, nunc pro tunc to the date received, the previously rejected motion to intervene (Doc 50-1). Plaintiffs Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno, and Kenneth Elliott and Defendant Securus Technologies, Inc. have until 9/05/2017, to file and serve a response to Rodriguezs motion to intervene. Rodriguezs reply, if he chooses to submit one, is due on or before 9/26/2017. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 8/01/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp) (Entered: 08/01/2017)

Aug. 1, 2017 PACER
53

MOTION to Intervene by Pedro Rodriguez. (Attachments: # 1 part 2 of 3, # 2 part 3 of 3). NUNC PRO TUNC 7/06/2017(jpp) (Entered: 08/01/2017)

Aug. 1, 2017 PACER
54

MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Marron, Ronald) (jpp). (Entered: 08/28/2017)

Aug. 28, 2017 PACER
55

ORDER granting 54 Plaintiffs' Motion to withdraw Attorney Adam T. Belsey. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 8/29/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp) (Entered: 08/29/2017)

Aug. 29, 2017 PACER
56

NOTICE of Change of Address by Robert L. Teel (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (jpp). (Entered: 08/31/2017)

Aug. 31, 2017 PACER
57

RESPONSE in Opposition re 53 MOTION to Intervene of Pedro Rodriguez filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 09/05/2017)

Sept. 5, 2017 PACER
58

RESPONSE in Opposition re 51 MOTION for Reconsideration, 53 MOTION to Intervene filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (jpp). (Entered: 09/05/2017)

Sept. 5, 2017 PACER
59

Joint MOTION for Discovery Determination of Dispute by Kenneth Elliott. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 to Joint Motion for Determination of Discovery Dispute, # 2 Exhibit 2 to Joint Motion for Determination of Discovery Dispute, # 3 Exhibit 3 to Joint Motion for Determination of Discovery Dispute, # 4 Declaration of Compliance with Chambers Rule IV. Requirements, # 5 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert)(jpp) (Entered: 09/22/2017)

Sept. 22, 2017 PACER
60

MOTION for Discovery to File Document Under Seal by Kenneth Elliott. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (aef). (Entered: 09/22/2017)

Sept. 22, 2017 PACER
61

Minute Order by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller: Submitting, 53 MOTION to Intervene by Pedro Rodriguez. Written order to follow. (no document attached) (gac) (Entered: 10/02/2017)

Oct. 2, 2017 PACER
62

MOTION to Certify Class and to Appoint Class Counsel by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities, # 2 Declaration of Robert Teel, # 3 Table of Exhibits, # 4 Exhibit 1, # 5 Exhibit 2, # 6 Exhibit 3, # 7 Exhibit 4, # 8 Exhibit 5, # 9 Exhibit 6, # 10 Exhibit 7, # 11 Exhibit 8, # 12 Exhibit 9, # 13 Exhibit 10, # 14 Exhibit 11, # 15 Exhibit 12, # 16 Exhibit 13, # 17 Exhibit 14, # 18 Exhibit 15, # 19 Exhibit 16, # 20 Exhibit 17, # 21 Exhibit 18, # 22 Exhibit 19, # 23 Exhibit 20, # 24 Exhibit 21, # 25 Exhibit 22, # 26 Exhibit 23, # 27 Exhibit 24, # 28 Exhibit 25, # 29 Exhibit 26, # 30 Exhibit 27, # 31 Exhibit 28, # 32 Exhibit 29, # 33 Exhibit 30, # 34 Exhibit 31, # 35 Exhibit 32, # 36 Exhibit 33, # 37 Request for Judicial Notice, # 38 Declaration of Kenneth Elliott, # 39 Exhibit 1- Elliott Dec, # 40 Exhibit 2- Elliott Dec, # 41 Declaration of Juan Romero, # 42 Exhibit 1-Romero Dec, # 43 Declaration of Frank Tiscareno, # 44 Exhibit 1-Tiscareno Dec, # 45 Declaration of Ronald Marron, # 46 Exhibit 1- Marron Dec, # 47 Exhibit 2-Marron Dec, # 48 Declaration of Robert Teel (Supplemental), # 49 Declaration of Patrick Ivie, # 50 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (jpp). (Entered: 10/10/2017)

1 Memo of Points and Authorities

View on PACER

2 Declaration of Robert Teel

View on RECAP

3 Table of Exhibits

View on PACER

4 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

5 Exhibit 2

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 3

View on PACER

7 Exhibit 4

View on PACER

8 Exhibit 5

View on PACER

9 Exhibit 6

View on PACER

10 Exhibit 7

View on PACER

11 Exhibit 8

View on PACER

12 Exhibit 9

View on PACER

13 Exhibit 10

View on PACER

14 Exhibit 11

View on PACER

15 Exhibit 12

View on PACER

16 Exhibit 13

View on PACER

17 Exhibit 14

View on PACER

18 Exhibit 15

View on PACER

19 Exhibit 16

View on PACER

20 Exhibit 17

View on PACER

21 Exhibit 18

View on PACER

22 Exhibit 19

View on PACER

23 Exhibit 20

View on PACER

24 Exhibit 21

View on PACER

25 Exhibit 22

View on PACER

26 Exhibit 23

View on PACER

27 Exhibit 24

View on PACER

28 Exhibit 25

View on PACER

29 Exhibit 26

View on PACER

30 Exhibit 27

View on PACER

31 Exhibit 28

View on PACER

32 Exhibit 29

View on PACER

33 Exhibit 30

View on PACER

34 Exhibit 31

View on PACER

35 Exhibit 32

View on PACER

36 Exhibit 33

View on PACER

37 Request for Judicial Notice

View on PACER

38 Declaration of Kenneth Elliott

View on PACER

39 Exhibit 1- Elliott Dec

View on PACER

40 Exhibit 2- Elliott Dec

View on PACER

41 Declaration of Juan Romero

View on PACER

42 Exhibit 1-Romero Dec

View on PACER

43 Declaration of Frank Tiscareno

View on PACER

44 Exhibit 1-Tiscareno Dec

View on PACER

45 Declaration of Ronald Marron

View on RECAP

46 Exhibit 1- Marron Dec

View on PACER

47 Exhibit 2-Marron Dec

View on PACER

48 Declaration of Robert Teel (Supplemental)

View on PACER

49 Declaration of Patrick Ivie

View on PACER

50 Proof of Service

View on PACER

Oct. 10, 2017 PACER
63

MOTION to File Documents Under Seal (With attachments)(Teel, Robert) Modified on 10/11/2017- QC mailer sent re sealed lodged proposed document not filed (aef). (Entered: 10/10/2017)

Oct. 10, 2017 PACER
64

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 60 Motion to Seal. Good cause appears to file Exhibit B to Exhibit 1 of the Joint Motion to Determine Discovery Dispute [59-1]. The remainder of the document is to be filed publicly. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 10/13/17. (no document attached) (Dembin, Mitchell) (Entered: 10/13/2017)

Oct. 13, 2017 PACER
66

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 59 Joint MOTION for Discovery Determination of Dispute. This Joint Motion presents Plaintiffs' motion to compel further responses to interrogatories, production of documents and answers to requests for admission. As provided herein, the motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. To the extent that the Court has ordered further responses, production and answers, such must be forthcoming within 14 days of the filing of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 10/16/17. (Dembin, Mitchell) (Entered: 10/16/2017)

Oct. 16, 2017 RECAP
67

***FILED AS SEALED DOCUMENT ON 10/13/2017*** - SEALED LODGED Proposed Document re: 60 MOTION to Seal a Previously Filed Document. Document to be filed by Clerk if Motion to Seal is granted. (With attachments)(Teel, Robert) Modified on 10/16/2017 to replace with correct pdf; add lodgment file date (aef). (Entered: 10/16/2017)

Oct. 16, 2017 PACER
68

NOTICE of Appearance by Michael Houchin on behalf of Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(Houchin, Michael)Attorney Michael Houchin added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla), Attorney Michael Houchin added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney Michael Houchin added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (jpp). (Entered: 10/17/2017)

Oct. 17, 2017 PACER
69

Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Amend 46 Order Following Case Management Conference by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Robert Teel Regarding Joint Motion, # 2 Declaration of Tania Rice Regarding Joint Motion, # 3 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (Entered: 10/24/2017)

Oct. 24, 2017 PACER
70

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE (ECF NO. 66) re 66 Order on Motion for Discovery,, by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Declaration of Gretchen A. Ramos, # 2 Exhibit B - Defendant's Proposed Stipulated Protective Order)(Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 10/30/2017)

Oct. 30, 2017 PACER
71

STRICKEN PER ORDER 78 - RESPONSE in Opposition re 62 MOTION to Certify Class and to Appoint Class Counsel filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Evidentiary Objections to Plaintiffs' Declarations in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, # 2 Appendix of Electronic Authorities cited in Support of Securus's Oppositions to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice, # 3 Combined Exhibits 1-29 to Appendix of Electronic Authorities cited in Support of Securus's Oppositions)(Fox, Adam) (jpp). Modified on 11/8/2017 to strike per order 78 (jpp). (Entered: 10/30/2017)

Oct. 30, 2017 PACER
72

RESPONSE in Opposition re 62 MOTION to Certify Class and to Appoint Class Counsel filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Securus' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, # 2 Securus' Evidentiary Objections to Plaintiffs' Declarations in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, # 3 Appendix of Electronic Authorities Cited in Support of Securus' Oppositions to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice, # 4 Exhibit [Combined Exhibits 1-29] to Appendix of Electronic Authorities)(Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 10/30/2017)

Oct. 30, 2017 PACER
73

ORDER denying 53 Motion to Intervene. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 10/31/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp) (Entered: 10/31/2017)

Oct. 31, 2017 RECAP
74

REPLY to Response to Motion re 62 MOTION to Certify Class and to Appoint Class Counsel filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Robert Teel re Delayed Discovery Responses, # 2 Exhibit 1 to Teel Decl., # 3 Exhibit 2 to Teel Decl., # 4 Declaration of Kenneth Elliott re Correcting Scrivener's Errors, # 5 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (jpp). (Entered: 11/06/2017)

Nov. 6, 2017 PACER
75

MINUTE ORDER: 62 Motion to Certify Class and to Appoint Class Counsel is currently set for November 13, 2017 at 10:00 AM. The Court finds this matter suitable for determination on the papers and without oral argument. Accordingly, no appearances are required and the hearing shall be taken off calendar. SO ORDERED by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. (no document attached) (pdc) (Entered: 11/07/2017)

Nov. 7, 2017 PACER
76

Ex Parte MOTION (Unopposed) to Strike Erroneous Docket Entry 71 Filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 11/07/2017)

Nov. 7, 2017 PACER
77

ORDER Granting 63 Plaintiffs' Motion to File Documents Under Seal. The Court grants the motion. The Clerk of Court is directed to file under seal the attached documents as Exhibits 1 through 7 to the instant motion currently listed as ECF entry number 63. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 11/7/2017. (aef) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

Nov. 7, 2017 PACER
79

ORDER granting 76 Defendant's Motion to Strike erroneous docket entry 71. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 11/08/2017. (jpp) (Entered: 11/08/2017)

Nov. 8, 2017 PACER
80

ORDER denying 69 Motion to modify Plaintiff's deadline to amend pleadings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 11/20/2017. (jpp) (Entered: 11/20/2017)

Nov. 20, 2017 RECAP
81

RESPONSE in Opposition re 70 MOTION FOR NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE (ECF NO. 66) re 66 Order on Motion for Discovery,, filed by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Robert Teel, # 2 Proof of Service)(Marron, Ronald) (jpp). (Entered: 11/20/2017)

Nov. 20, 2017 PACER
82

REPLY to Response to Motion re 70 MOTION FOR NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE (ECF NO. 66) re 66 Order on Motion for Discovery,, filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017 PACER
83

Minute Order by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller: Submitting, 70 Motion for Non-dispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge, 66 Order on Motion for Discovery. Motion Hearing set for 12/4/2017 at 11:00 AM before Judge Jeffrey Miller is vacated. Written order to follow. (no document attached) (gac) (Entered: 11/28/2017)

Nov. 28, 2017 PACER
84

Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller Rejecting Document: Notice of Change of Address and Request for Information.. Non-compliance with local rule(s), OTHER: Per Docket entry #73, Pedro Rodriguezs Motion to Intervene was denied, Pedro Rodrigues is not a party to this case., Rejected document was returned to the filer. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 11/28/2017.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/28/2017: # 1 rejected document) (jpp). (Entered: 11/28/2017)

Nov. 28, 2017 PACER
85

Ex Parte MOTION for Discovery Determination of Dispute (Joint Motion with No Contribution) by Kenneth Elliott. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 to Discovery Motion, # 2 Exhibit 2 to Discovery Motion, # 3 Declaration of Compliance with Chambers Rule IV Requirements, # 4 Proof of Service)(Teel, Robert) (jpp). (Entered: 11/29/2017)

Nov. 29, 2017 PACER
86

NOTICE of Intent to Respond to Ex Parte Motion by Securus Technologies, Inc. re 85 Ex Parte MOTION for Discovery Determination of Dispute (Joint Motion with No Contribution) (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Adam R. Fox In Support of Notice of Intent to Respond to Ex Parte Motion)(Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 12/05/2017)

Dec. 5, 2017 PACER
87

ORDER: An Ex Parte Motion for Joint Determination of Discovery Dispute was filed by Plaintiffs. 85 A Notice of Intent to Respond was filed by Defendant. 86 Accordingly, Defendant may file a response on or before December 22, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 12/15/2017.(no document attached) (atk) (Entered: 12/15/2017)

Dec. 15, 2017 PACER
88

RESPONSE to Motion re 85 Ex Parte MOTION for Discovery Determination of Dispute (Joint Motion with No Contribution) and to Compel Discovery Responses filed by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 12/22/2017)

Dec. 22, 2017 PACER
89

ORDER: A Discovery Hearing regarding ECF No. 85 will be held on January 8, 2018 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin, Courtroom 1E in the Edward J. Schwartz Courthouse, 221 West Broadway, San Diego, CA, 92101. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 01/02/2018.(no document attached) (atk) (Entered: 01/02/2018)

Jan. 2, 2018 PACER
90

Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller Rejecting Document: Letter to Hon. Judge Miller re Notice and Motion to Vacate Dismissal.. Non-compliance with local rule(s), L.R. Cv. 5.1(h): Filer not a party to the case; L.R. Cv. 83.9: Ex parte communication is prohibited. Rejected document was returned to the filer. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 1/05/2018.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/5/2018: # 1 rejected document) (jpp). (Entered: 01/05/2018)

Jan. 5, 2018 PACER
91

ORDER denying 70 Defendant's Motion for relief from non-dispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 1/05/2018. (jpp) (Entered: 01/05/2018)

Jan. 5, 2018 RECAP
92

Minute Order for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin denying 85 Motion for Discovery: A Motion Hearing was held on January 8, 2018. regarding Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Motion for Discovery. The Court issued an oral ruling which is fully incorporated herein and includes the following: 1) Plaintiffs' request for RFPs regarding production of audio recordings is denied. The Court finds Defendant's response that no recordings exist responsive to Plaintiffs' request sufficient. 2) Plaintiffs' request for a further response from Defendant regarding specific Contention Interrogatories is denied. The Court finds Defendant's responses legally sufficient. (CD# 1/8/2018 10:36-11:02). (Plaintiff Attorney Robert Teel).(Defendant Attorney Marisol Mork). (no document attached) (atk) (Entered: 01/12/2018)

Jan. 8, 2018 PACER
93

ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 62 Motion to Certify Class and to Appoint Class Counsel. Court denies the motion without prejudice because Plaintiffs fail to sufficiently identify an ascertainable and manageable class. In the event Plaintiffs' additional discovery efforts prove fruitful, they may renew their motion for class certification within 90 days of the entry of this Order. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 4/12/2018. (jah) (Entered: 04/13/2018)

April 12, 2018 RECAP
94

NOTICE of Appearance by Nicholas J. Fox on behalf of Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Fox, Nicholas)Attorney Nicholas J. Fox added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla), Attorney Nicholas J. Fox added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney Nicholas J. Fox added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (jpp). (Entered: 04/19/2018)

April 19, 2018 PACER
95

NOTICE of Appearance by Eileen Regina Ridley on behalf of Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Ridley, Eileen)Attorney Eileen Regina Ridley added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla), Attorney Eileen Regina Ridley added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney Eileen Regina Ridley added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (jpp). (Entered: 04/19/2018)

April 19, 2018 PACER
96

NOTICE of Appearance by J. Mark Waxman on behalf of Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno (Waxman, J.)Attorney J. Mark Waxman added to party Kenneth Elliott(pty:pla), Attorney J. Mark Waxman added to party Juan Romero(pty:pla), Attorney J. Mark Waxman added to party Frank Tiscareno(pty:pla) (Entered: 04/20/2018)

April 20, 2018 PACER
97

ORDER: A telephonic Case Management Conference will be held 4/30/2018 at 9:15 AM before Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin. Only counsel are required to participate. Counsel are ordered to use the dial-in information filed as a separate notice to access the Court's teleconference service. (The teleconference information sheet can be accessed through ECF using the login information assigned to an attorney of record in the case and then selecting the report option. On the next screen, the docket sheet option should be selected, prompting the user for a PACER login (assigned to the attorney of record). Once the PACER login is completed, the case number can be entered which will display the docket sheet for the case and allow the user to open the teleconference information sheet.). Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 04/20/2018.(no document attached) (atk) (Entered: 04/20/2018)

April 20, 2018 PACER
98

NOTICE of Teleconference Information Sheet. Teleconference set for 04/30/2018 at 9:15AM. (atk) (Entered: 04/20/2018)

April 20, 2018 PACER
99

MOTION to Amend/Correct 93 Order on Motion to Certify Class, by Securus Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Adam R. Fox in Support of Motion to Alter or Amend the Order Denying Motion for Class Certification, # 2 Appendix, # 3 Exhibit 1 to Appendix, # 4 Exhibit 2 to Appendix, # 5 Exhibit 3 to Appendix, # 6 Exhibit 4 to Appendix, # 7 Proposed Order)(Fox, Adam) (jpp). (Entered: 04/20/2018)

April 20, 2018 PACER
100

ORDER: On the Court's own motion, the telephonic Case Management Conference scheduled for April 30, 2018 is vacated pending resolution of Defendant's Motion to Amend/Correct Order on Motion to Certify Class. 99 . A case management conference may be rescheduled upon request following a ruling on Defendant's motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin on 04/22/2018.(no document attached) (atk) (Entered: 04/22/2018)

April 22, 2018 PACER
101

MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment by Kenneth Elliott, Juan Romero, Frank Tiscareno. (Attachments: # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Request for Judicial Notice)(Fox, Nicholas)(jpp). (Entered: 05/22/2018)

May 22, 2018 PACER
102

ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATES: Motion Hearing re 99 MOTION to Amend/Correct: 93 Order on Motion to Certify Class; 101 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment is vacated and continued to 7/2/2018 10:00 AM in Courtroom 5D before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on May 22, 2018.(gac) (Entered: 05/23/2018)

May 23, 2018 RECAP

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 27, 2016

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Former prisoners who had used Securus phones while confined in San Diego County detention facilities.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Securus Technologies, Inc. , Private Entity/Person

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

State law

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Attorneys fees

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: $900,000

Issues

General:

Confidentiality

Phone

Type of Facility:

Government-run