UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES BEFORE JUDGE VINCE CHHABRIA
TABLE OF KEY DEADLINES ........................................................................................................... 2
CONFORMITY WITH RULES ........................................................................................................... 2
EMERGENCY APPLICATIONS......................................................................................................... 2
SCHEDULING ..................................................................................................................................... 3
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES ......................................................................................... 4
DISCOVERY ........................................................................................................................................ 5
FILING AND COURTESY COPIES ................................................................................................... 6
PROPOSED ORDERS.......................................................................................................................... 8
MOTIONS TO SEAL ........................................................................................................................... 8
BRIEFS ............................................................................................................................................... 10
SUMMARY JUDGMENT.................................................................................................................. 10
DEFAULT JUDGMENT .................................................................................................................... 12
HEARINGS AND TENTATIVE RULINGS ..................................................................................... 12
CLASS ACTIONS .............................................................................................................................. 13
PATENT CASES ................................................................................................................................ 19
SOCIAL SECURITY CASES ............................................................................................................ 20
HABEAS CASES ............................................................................................................................... 20
ERISA CASES .................................................................................................................................... 21
WAGE AND HOUR CASES ............................................................................................................. 21
SECTION 1983 CASES...................................................................................................................... 22
TABLE OF KEY DEADLINES
DEADLINE DATE
Joint discovery letters As soon as practicable, but no later than 7
days after applicable discovery deadline
Cross-motions for summary judgment Because the Court requires the parties to file
4 sequential briefs, typically the parties must
file the first brief no later than 7 weeks before
the scheduled hearing date. The final brief
should be filed no later than 14 days before
the scheduled hearing date.
Request for extension of any case 72 hours prior to the deadline party wishes to
management deadlines extend
Request to reschedule a case management At least 72 hours prior to the case
conference management conference
CONFORMITY WITH RULES
1. The parties shall follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Local
Rules, and the General Orders of the Northern District of California, except as superseded by this
Court’s standing orders.
EMERGENCY APPLICATIONS
2. When a party files an application for a temporary restraining order or other
emergency relief, the opposing party should not file a response unless instructed to do so by the
Court. The Court will almost never grant such an application without requesting a response from
the opposing party.
2
3. If the party seeking emergency relief does not show that it made every reasonable
effort to notify the opposing party and the opposing party’s counsel, at the earliest possible time,
of its intent to seek emergency relief, the relief will not be granted.
4. Emergency applications do not have to comply with Judge Chhabria’s default 15-
page limit for briefs.
SCHEDULING
5. For the latest information on when and where hearings and case management
conferences are held, check Judge Chhabria’s webpage.
6. Counsel need not reserve hearing dates but should check Judge Chhabria’s
calendar on the Court’s website to make sure the desired date is not blocked. The parties may not
specially set any matter without leave of the Court.
7. Counsel for the moving party should confer with opposing counsel about a
mutually convenient hearing date before noticing any motion.
8. No changes to the Court’s schedule can be made except by order of the Court.
Any motion to continue a hearing or case management conference must be made no later than 72
hours prior to the scheduled appearance.
9. Any request for an extension of a deadline (other than an extension that the rules
allow the parties to arrange between themselves without a court order) must be filed no later than
72 hours prior to the deadline.
10. When the parties request an extension of time, the parties must submit a proposed
order listing all future deadlines and the proposed extensions. The parties must also submit,
alongside any stipulation or administrative motion to change deadlines, a chart that includes the
currently scheduled deadlines and the parties’ proposed deadlines. If the parties disagree on what
3
the new deadlines should be, the chart must reflect both parties’ proposals. The parties must also
state how many times the parties have requested extensions, whether the Court has granted those
extensions, and whether the Court has stated that no further extensions will be granted.
11. Once a trial date has been set, the parties should treat it as firm. Absent
extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not continue a trial date.
12. Stipulations or motions to continue case schedules for mediation or
settlement purposes will usually not be granted.
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES
13. The attorney appearing at a case management conference need not be lead counsel
but must have full authority to make decisions about any issue that may come up during the
conference. They must also be sufficiently informed about the case to participate in discussions
about what schedule makes sense for that case.
14. If a defendant files a motion to dismiss that is dispositive of the entire case, the
parties can stipulate to move the initial case management conference to 15 days after the hearing
on that motion. If the motion to dismiss is not dispositive, the initial case management
conference will typically not be moved. In their case management statement for the initial case
management conference, the parties must propose a full litigation schedule, including a proposed
last day to amend pleadings, regardless of whether they have received a ruling on any motion to
dismiss. The only exception is proposed class actions, in which case the parties can propose a
schedule through the first phase of the case, as discussed in the class action section of this standing
order.
15. Parties should typically be prepared to adopt the following schedule at the initial
case management conference:
● The trial date will almost always be 12–16 months after the date the original complaint
4
was filed.
● The pretrial conference will be 1 or 2 weeks before the trial. The last day for a hearing on
dispositive motions will be roughly 2 to 3 months before the pretrial conference.
● The discovery cutoff will be roughly 8 weeks before the dispositive motions hearing.
(The parties should consider whether to schedule expert discovery before or after the
deadline for hearing motions for summary judgment.)
● The last day to amend pleadings will typically be 60 days after the initial case
management conference.
● A further case management conference will take place roughly 4 weeks before the close
of fact discovery.
● The parties should be prepared to present their preferred ADR process at the initial case
management conference.
16. If the parties wish to continue a case management conference, they must file a
stipulation or motion—in a separate filing from their joint case management statement—at least
72 hours prior to the conference.
17. Parties who would like an expedited initial case management conference can
request one by emailing Judge Chhabria’s Courtroom Deputy, Bhavna Sharma.
DISCOVERY
18. Discovery in almost all cases will be referred to a magistrate judge. In those cases,
the parties must follow the magistrate judge’s procedures. However, the parties are encouraged
to bring discovery disputes to the magistrate judge sooner rather than later. If the parties end up
seeking a continuation of the case schedule based on the pendency of discovery disputes, the
Court will deny that request if it determines that brewing discovery disputes were not teed up
5
promptly for the magistrate judge, and the parties will simply need to go to trial without having
conducted the desired discovery.
19. In the rare cases where Judge Chhabria is overseeing discovery, the following
procedures apply. Discovery disputes should be brought to the Court’s attention as early as
possible. If the parties cannot resolve their discovery dispute after a good faith effort, they shall
prepare and file a joint letter of no longer than 5 pages stating the nature and status of their
dispute. Both sides must submit proposed orders as well. No exhibits may be submitted with the
letter other than any discovery request or response that is the subject of the letter. The letter must
be filed as soon as possible, but under no circumstances may it be filed more than 7 days after
the applicable discovery cutoff. See Civil Local Rule 37-3. The side seeking relief from the
Court should prepare its portion of the letter first, and then provide that to the opposing side so
that the opposing side may prepare its response. The party seeking relief from the Court should
file the letter. The Court may resolve the dispute on the papers or schedule a hearing. The joint
discovery letter process does not apply to discovery disputes with third parties.
20. Parties requesting a protective order or ESI order are encouraged to base any
proposed order on the model orders on the Northern District’s website
(http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/model-protective-orders; https://cand.uscourts.gov/forms/e-
discovery-esi-guidelines). When filing a proposed order, at the very beginning of their stipulation
or motion, parties must indicate whether they have based their proposed order on one of the
Northern District’s model orders. If they have, they must identify any deviations from the model
order by submitting as an exhibit a redline comparison of their proposed order and the model
order.
FILING AND COURTESY COPIES
21. When filing motions on ECF, each motion, supporting declaration, and
6
attachment to a declaration (such as an exhibit) should be filed as a separate PDF. That is, a
declaration must be filed separately from the motion, and each exhibit to a declaration must be
filed separately from the declaration and from the other exhibits. However, when an exhibit to a
declaration contains an attachment, that attachment need not be filed separately. A motion, along
with any supporting declarations or exhibits, should generally be filed as one docket entry, with
the motion submitted as the “Main Document” in ECF, and each declaration and exhibit filed
separately as “Attachments.”
22. For an example, see the image below:
23. When filing motions, exhibits, and declarations, the ECF “Description” of each
document should include the name of the document and a brief description of the document. For
instance, a news release filed as the first exhibit to a declaration would be, “Decl Doe Ex 1 -
News Release.”
24. When a document filed on ECF is accompanied by more than 10
attachments, the filing party must upload those documents within 3 days onto an online
location designed by the Clerk’s Office. The name of each uploaded PDF file should adhere
to the naming convention described above and should include the docket number of the
7
filed document. For example, a news release filed as the first exhibit to a declaration, at
docket number 60-2 should be uploaded with the file name “[60-2] Decl Doe Ex 1 - News
Release.” On occasion, the parties may be asked by the courtroom deputy to deliver a flash
drive with all the attachments to Judge Chhabria’s chambers. The flash drive should be
labeled with the name and number of the case. The flash drive should contain the ECF
version of each attachment, with its ECF header. The name of each PDF file on the flash
drive should include the type of document, a brief description of the document, and the
docket number. Each PDF document must be text-searchable. This requirement is waived
for people proceeding pro se.
25. Briefs, declarations, and other filings need not be on pleading paper with line
numbers. The Court prefers blank paper (although pleading paper will be accepted).
26. Paper courtesy copies shall not be submitted unless the Court requests them. The
Court may at times order the parties to provide digital courtesy copies of motion briefs, including
supporting documents, on portable media (for example, a CD or flash drive).
PROPOSED ORDERS
27. Proposed orders are not necessary for most substantive motions, such as motions
for summary judgment, motions to dismiss, or preliminary injunction motions. The parties
should submit proposed orders only in connection with administrative motions, stipulations
requiring modifications of the case schedule, ex parte applications, discovery disputes, and
rulings that call upon the court to make factual findings (such as a motion to approve a class
settlement or a motion for attorneys’ fees). All proposed orders should be sent in Microsoft
Word format to
[email protected]
MOTIONS TO SEAL
28. The Court requires strict compliance with Civil Local Rule 79-5 (with the
8
exception of 79-5(d)(2), as explained below).
29. The Court almost always denies motions to seal because they are almost always
without merit. Parties that submit frivolous motions to seal or frivolously overbroad motions will
be sanctioned. See Nevro Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp., 2018 WL 2111164 (N.D. Cal. May 8,
2018). Federal courts are paid for by the public, and the public has the right to inspect court
records, subject only to narrow exceptions.
30. When submitting a motion to seal, the filing party must state whether the
compelling reasons or good cause standard applies and explain why. See Center for Auto
Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016).
31. The filing party must make a specific showing explaining why each document
that it seeks to seal may justifiably be sealed and why the proposed redactions are as narrowly
tailored as possible, rather than making a blanket statement about the grounds for sealing.
Generic and vague references to “competitive harm” are almost always insufficient justification
for sealing. If a party files a request to seal that is significantly overbroad and/or does not provide
adequate reasons for concealing information from the public, the party bears the risk that the
Court will simply deny the request in its entirety and place all documents sought to be sealed on
the public docket.
32. Each document filed under seal must be highlighted to show the proposed
redactions. In the rare situation where a party believes it is appropriate to seal an entire
document, the document filed under seal should be labeled to indicate that sealing is sought in
full.
33. If you have a complicated sealing motion, or set of motions, consider filling out
and filing the Motion to Seal Summary Table linked on the Standing Orders page of Judge
Chhabria’s website.
9
34. Courtesy copies under Civil Local Rule 79-5(d)(2) are not required, provided that
the document at issue is appropriately filed electronically under seal in an unredacted form.
BRIEFS
35. Unless permitted by the Court, briefs in support of and in opposition to all
substantive motions (except for preliminary injunction motions, summary judgment motions,
class certification motions, motions for approval of class settlements, and summary judgment /
claim construction motions in patent cases, as discussed below) may not exceed 15 pages, and
reply briefs may not exceed 10 pages. These page limits include summaries of argument and
exclude the title page, table of contents, table of authorities, and exhibits. All briefs must use
Times New Roman font (size 12) and must be double spaced.
36. The final brief for any motion should be filed at least 14 days prior to the hearing
on the motion.
37. When citing exhibits (including deposition testimony), briefs should identify the
declaration to which the exhibit is attached, the letter or number of the exhibit, and the relevant
page number (for example: “Smith Decl., Ex. 1, at 22”).
38. Motions to increase page limits will almost never be granted, but any such motion
must be filed no later than 72 hours before the brief is due.
39. Simultaneous briefing is not permitted for any type of motion.
40. Briefs in support of and in opposition to a preliminary injunction motion cannot
exceed 25 pages, and reply briefs cannot exceed 15 pages.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
41. Unless permitted by the Court, briefs in support of and in opposition to summary
judgment motions cannot exceed 25 pages, and reply briefs cannot exceed 15 pages. Motions to
10
increase page limits will almost never be granted, but any such motion must be filed no later
than 72 hours before the brief is due.
42. In the event of cross-motions for summary judgment, the parties must file a total
of four briefs sequentially, rather than three pairs of simultaneous briefs. Unless the parties agree
to reverse the order (which they are free to do on their own), the opening brief is filed by the
plaintiff side, the opening/opposition brief is filed by the defense side, the opposition/reply is
filed by the plaintiff side, and the reply is filed by the defense side. The first two briefs are
limited to 25 pages, the third brief is limited to 20 pages, and the fourth brief is limited to 15
pages. The parties may submit a stipulation and proposed order setting a briefing schedule for the
cross-motions in advance of the first brief, which will likely be signed so long as the fourth brief
is due no later than 14 days before the hearing date.
43. The parties should not file joint or separate statements of undisputed facts
in connection with summary judgment motions.
44. At the summary judgment hearing and/or in the briefs, the parties should not
hesitate to alert the Court of the need for a prompt ruling in light of their trial preparation
schedule.
45. Any Daubert motion seeking to preclude a party’s reliance on an expert opinion
at the summary judgment stage must be filed in the same brief as the motion for summary
judgment or the opposition to that motion. Oppositions and replies relating to the Daubert
motion must also be filed in the same briefs as argument on the merits of the summary judgment
motion. The only exception is when the party moving to exclude is the party opposing summary
judgment, in which case that party may file a reply brief (not to exceed 5 pages and filed no later
than 7 days after the other party’s reply in support of summary judgment) in support of the
Daubert motion.
11
DEFAULT JUDGMENT
46. Judge Chhabria’s rule is to have hearings on motions for default judgment except
in highly unusual circumstances. Therefore, after a party seeking default judgment has obtained
entry of default from the Clerk’s Office, the party should notice a hearing when filing their
motion for default judgment.
47. Any such motion should explain why the Eitel factors support the entry of a
default judgment and address the basis for personal jurisdiction over the defendant(s). See Eitel
v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471–72 (9th Cir. 1986); Axiom Foods Inc. v. Acerchem
International, Inc., 874 F.3d 1064, 1068 (9th Cir. 2017); see also In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 707, 712
(9th Cir. 1999).
HEARINGS AND TENTATIVE RULINGS
48. If the Court determines a hearing is not necessary, it will usually be vacated no
later than three days before the hearing.
49. The Court ordinarily will not issue tentative rulings, but it typically announces its
tentative thinking at the outset of the hearing.
50. If a motion will be argued by an attorney who has 7 years or less of experience,
counsel may notify the Courtroom Deputy of that fact within 7 days of the hearing. The Court
will take this into account in deciding whether to vacate the hearing and submit the motion on
the papers, putting a thumb on the scale in favor of a hearing if arguing counsel has 7 years or
less of experience. Co-counsel with more than 7 years of experience may still offer argument for
a few minutes at the end of the hearing.
51. When using exhibits during evidentiary hearings, the parties must prepare and
present exhibits in accordance with the Court’s Standing Order for Civil Trials.
12
CLASS ACTIONS
52. At the initial case management conference, the parties should be prepared to
discuss whether they prefer to litigate cross-motions for summary judgment on liability with
respect to the named plaintiffs before litigating the issue of class certification. The Court is of the
view that this approach will often save a great deal of time and money and is therefore often in
the defendant’s interest, but it requires the defendant’s consent, since a grant of summary
judgment in the named plaintiff’s favor could end up giving unnamed class members a chance to
opt in to a lawsuit where a legal issue has already been decided against the defendant.
53. Briefs in support of or opposition to class certification motions cannot exceed 25
pages, and reply briefs cannot exceed 15 pages. These limits also apply to motions for
preliminary or final approval of class settlements (although, if the parties believe they need more
space to adequately explain the basis for a class action settlement, this is the one type of brief for
which a request for additional pages is likely to be granted).
54. Any Daubert motion seeking to preclude a party’s reliance on an expert opinion
at the class certification stage must be filed in the same brief as the motion for class certification
or the opposition to that motion. Oppositions and replies relating to the Daubert motion must
also be filed in the same briefs as argument on the merits of the class certification motion. The
only exception is when the party moving to exclude is the party opposing class certification, in
which case that party may file a reply brief (not to exceed 5 pages and filed no later than 7 days
after the other party’s reply in support of class certification) in support of the Daubert motion.
55. In any motion for class certification, plaintiffs’ counsel must include a section
called “Manageability of the Class Action Trial” in which they explain precisely how the Court
should handle any potentially individualized issues to ensure that they don’t render the trial
unmanageable. This section should generally include a discussion of jury instructions, especially
13
in cases that involve subclasses, plaintiffs from multiple states, or law from multiple
jurisdictions. In addition, to assist the Court in assessing any manageability concerns, plaintiffs’
counsel must file a proposed verdict form in connection with the motion for class certification.
56. Plaintiffs’ counsel are warned that they may have only one chance to seek class
certification. If a plaintiff grossly overreaches on a motion for class certification, thereby forcing
a defendant to waste significant time and money respond to a motion that had virtually no chance
of being granted in the first place, the Court will be far less likely to allow a renewed motion.
57. In connection with motions for approval of class settlements, the parties should
keep the following things in mind:
The parties should consult the Northern District’s Procedural Guidance for Class Action
Settlements. See https://cand.uscourts.gov/rules-forms-fees/northern-district-
guidelines/procedural-guidance-class-action-settlements.
Preliminary Approval
The Court’s scrutiny of the proposed settlement will be as rigorous at the preliminary
approval stage as at the final approval stage. Any motion for preliminary approval should
explain why the settlement survives this level of scrutiny, and any proposed order should
recite this standard. See Cotter v. Lyft, Inc., 193 F. Supp. 3d 1030, 1036-37 (N.D. Cal.
2016); see also Hunt v. VEP Healthcare, Inc., 2017 WL 3608297 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 22,
2017); Eddings v. DS Services of America, Inc., 2016 WL 3390477 (N.D. Cal. May 20,
2016).
The proposed settlement administrator must submit a declaration in support of the
motion for preliminary approval that describes (a) any money or thing of value the
administrator will receive in connection with the settlement beyond the fee described in
the preliminary approval papers, including interest or float on settlement deposits,
14
payments from depository banks, and any revenue-sharing, ownership percentage, or
markups on settlement services from payment, claims processing, social media, or other
vendors; (b) any fees class members or claimants could be charged by the administrator
or its subcontractors in connection with the settlement, including interchange fees,
dormancy fees, or retention of residual balances; (c) whether data about visitors to the
settlement website or other settlement class data will be shared with third parties not
involved in administering the settlement, including via trackers or pixels; (d) whether
artificial intelligence will be used to administer the settlement either by the
administrator or subcontractors and, if so, what safeguards will ensure accuracy and
lack of bias; and (e) a detailed fraud prevention plan, including whether there will be
real-time fraud reporting and assessments to detect if an unusual number of payments
are being sent to linked accounts. Proposed class counsel’s declaration shall describe
what due diligence counsel performed regarding the proposed administrator’s approach
to each of the above issues, any potential conflict of interest or potential appearance of
conflict of interest for counsel in the selection of the administrator (including any
financial relationship), and the basis for counsel’s conclusion that the proposed
administration arrangements serve the best interests of the settlement class.
Release language should make clear that the class members are releasing claims based
only on the identical factual predicate. Each proposed notice should make that clear as
well. Hesse v. Sprint Corp., 598 F.3d 581, 590 (9th Cir. 2010).
Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not enjoin current or future litigation
in other courts based on conduct covered by the release. Whether to stay or dismiss any
15
such cases will be for the assigned judge to decide. Any language regarding an injunction
must be removed from the notice, proposed order, and settlement agreement.
If a proposed notice to class members (or prospective class members) requires a written
objection as a prerequisite to appearing in court to object to the settlement, the notice
must specify that this requirement may be excused upon a showing of good cause. The
Court will require only substantial compliance with the requirements for submitting an
objection, and this should be made clear in any notice to class members.
If the parties believe they need more space to adequately explain the basis for a
settlement, they should make a request to extend the page limit for the motion. The Court
will likely grant such a request for this kind of motion (despite rarely granting such
requests for other motions).
Notice and Claims Procedure
The proposed notices, claims forms, and other documents associated with preliminary
approval should be sent in Microsoft Word format to
[email protected].
For large settlements, the parties are encouraged to include an opt-out form and an
objection form.
If the proposed notices are not carefully written and in plain English, the Court will reject
the motion for preliminary approval. Unnecessary acronyms should be avoided.
The parties should consider using the Federal Judicial Center’s model notices, which are
available at www.fjc.gov/content/301253/illustrative-forms-class-action-notices-
introduction.
The parties should consider whether notice by email and/or social media is appropriate.
Moreover, the parties should consider whether claims and opt-out forms can be filed
16
online, and whether it is appropriate to have a website for the settlement. If these
procedures are not followed, the parties should be prepared to explain why.
In a proposed settlement involving the distribution of money to a class, the parties should
consider whether unclaimed funds should be redistributed to class members who claimed
their share. If a provision of this type is absent, the parties should be prepared to explain
why.
The parties should consider whether theirs is the type of settlement that requires class
members to file claims, as opposed to simply receiving funds. The motion for
preliminary approval should address this issue.
Although the parties should generally adhere to the Northern District’s Procedural
Guidance for Class Action Settlements, they need not discuss “the lead class counsel’s
firms’ history of engagements with the settlement administrator over the last two years.”
Nor does lead counsel need to discuss “at least one of their past comparable class
settlements.”
Final Approval
In proposing a schedule for final approval of a class settlement, the parties must ensure
that the motion for attorneys’ fees is filed at least 14 days before the deadline for
objecting to the settlement. See In re Mercury Interactive Corp. Sec. Litig., 618 F.3d 988
(9th Cir. 2010). The Court will make parties re-send notices if the motion for attorneys’
fees is filed late, which can be quite expensive. The proposed order granting final
approval should list all dates relating to the administration of the settlement, including the
dates for when the checks distributing the settlement fund payments will be mailed to
class members.
17
The parties should file a proposed judgment separately from their proposed order
granting final approval.
Within 21 days after the settlement funds have been fully distributed to class members
(but before distribution to cy pres recipients), class counsel will be required to file a Post-
Distribution Accounting, as described in the Northern District’s Procedural Guidance for
Class Action Settlements. The purpose of this notice is to inform the Court about the
administration of the settlement.
The Court will typically withhold between 10% and 20% of the attorneys’ fees granted at
final approval until after the Post-Distribution Accounting has been filed. The proposed
order granting final approval should specify what percentage class counsel believes it is
appropriate to withhold.
The proposed order granting final approval should also include language describing the
Post-Distribution Accounting that class counsel will file, including, as relevant, when
payments were made to class members, the number of members who were sent payments,
the total amount of money paid out to members, the average and median recovery per
class member, the largest and smallest amount paid to class members, the number and
value of cashed and uncashed checks, the number of members who could not be
contacted, the number of objections and opt-outs, the amount to be distributed to each cy
pres recipient, any significant or recurring concerns communicated by members to the
settlement administrator and counsel since final approval, any other issues in settlement
administration since final approval, and how any concerns or issues were resolved. See
Cotter v. Lyft, No. 13-cv-04065-VC, Dkt. No. 348 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 6, 2018); Hunt v. VEP
Healthcare, Inc., No. 16-cv-04790-VC, Dkt. No. 68 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2018).
18
Where class members are entitled to non-monetary relief, such as discount coupons, debit
cards, or similar instruments, the Post-Distribution Accounting should also describe the
number of class members availing themselves of such relief and the aggregate value
redeemed by the class members and/or by an assignees or transferees of the class
members’ interests. Where class members are entitled to injunctive and/or other non-
monetary relief, the Post-Distribution Accounting should discuss the progress made on
fulfilling the terms of that relief.
With the Post-Distribution Accounting, class counsel should submit a proposed order
releasing the remainder of the fees.
PATENT CASES
58. Parties must follow the Patent Local Rules of the Northern District of California,
except when those rules conflict with this standing order.
59. Absent a compelling reason, the Court will conduct claim construction only in
conjunction with a dispositive motion. Parties should still follow Rules 4-1 through 4-4 of the
Patent Local Rules. Rules 4-5 and 4-6, on the other hand, will give way to the details provided in
the paragraphs below.
60. The opening summary judgment (and claim construction) brief, as well as the
opposition brief, cannot exceed 40 pages. The reply brief cannot exceed 20 pages.
61. In the event of cross-motions for summary judgment, the parties must file a total
of four briefs sequentially, rather than three pairs of simultaneous briefs. Unless the parties agree
to reverse the order, the opening brief is filed by the party asserting infringement, the
opening/opposition brief is filed by the party defending against the infringement claim, the
opposition/reply is filed by the party asserting infringement, and the reply is filed by the party
19
defending against the infringement claim. The first brief is limited to 40 pages, the second brief
is limited to 50 pages, the third brief is limited to 30 pages, and the fourth brief is limited to 20
pages.
62. If the parties believe it would be helpful for the Court, they should schedule a
claim construction tutorial to occur 7 days prior to the claim construction/summary judgment
hearing. The parties should contact Judge Chhabria’s Courtroom Deputy, Bhavna Sharma, to
schedule the tutorial.
SOCIAL SECURITY CASES
63. Judge Chhabria’s default rule is to have hearings in Social Security cases. The
Court will schedule a hearing for its civil law and motion calendar for approximately 60 days
after an opposition brief is filed. Counsel are free to meet and confer on a mutually acceptable
hearing date, and contact Bhavna Sharma, Judge Chhabria’s Courtroom Deputy, to schedule a
hearing on that date. If, after reviewing the papers and the record, the Court decides a hearing is
not necessary, it will typically notify the parties within 2–3 days of the hearing.
HABEAS CASES
64. Judge Chhabria’s default rule is to have hearings in habeas cases where the
petitioner is represented by counsel. The Court will schedule a hearing for its civil law and
motion calendar for approximately 60 days after an answer is filed. Counsel are free to meet and
confer on a mutually acceptable hearing date, and contact Bhavna Sharma, Judge Chhabria’s
Courtroom Deputy, to schedule a hearing on that date. If, after reviewing the papers and the
record, the Court decides a hearing is not necessary, it will typically notify the parties within 2–3
days of the hearing.
20
ERISA CASES
65. On the issue of discovery in cases that are subject to de novo review, please see
Ball v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2016 WL 3211227 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2016).
WAGE AND HOUR CASES
66. In FLSA cases, the presumptive deadline for filing a motion for conditional
certification of a collective is 28 days from the date of the initial case management conference,
unless the parties reach a tolling agreement. Motions for conditional certification are almost
always granted. The parties therefore are encouraged to stipulate to conditional certification with
the understanding that the defendant may later seek to decertify the collective. If the parties
stipulate to conditional certification, the parties must still submit the proposed notice to the Court
for approval.
67. Absent extraordinary circumstances, the contact information for potential
collective members in FLSA cases must be produced by the defendant at the Rule 26(f)
conference. The court will almost never grant requests to continue the initial case management
conference in FLSA cases—even if there is a pending motion to dismiss—unless the parties have
reached a tolling agreement.
68. Likewise, in a Rule 23 wage and hour class action brought under California law,
absent extraordinary circumstances, the contact information for potential class members must be
produced early in the case. At the initial case management conference, the parties should expect
to set an early deadline for the production of this information. Typically, the only circumstance
in which this production may be delayed is when the schedule calls for cross-motions for
summary judgment regarding liability as to the named plaintiffs to be adjudicated prior to class
certification, as discussed in the “Class Actions” section of this standing order.
21
69. Should the parties reach a settlement in a FLSA collective action, the parties may
not simply file a notice of voluntary dismissal. The parties must file a motion for settlement
approval explaining why the proposed settlement is a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona
fide dispute. See Alder v. County of Yolo, No. 16-1682-VC, Dkt. No. 25 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20,
2017).
SECTION 1983 CASES
70. In cases involving Monell claims, the Court will often stay discovery on
municipal liability until the individual constitutional claim has been adjudicated through trial.
Therefore, in cases where the defendant believes that the plaintiff has stated an individual
constitutional claim but has failed to state a Monell claim, the defendant should consider whether
to seek a stay of the Monell claim in lieu of filing a motion to dismiss. A stay of a Monell claim
will often preserve resources for the defendant, as compared to litigating multiple motions to
dismiss. If the defendant chooses to seek a stay of a Monell claim, the deadline to file a motion to
dismiss is tolled by the filing of the stay motion (and by the stay itself, if any). If a defendant
chooses instead to file a motion to dismiss a Monell claim, the defendant should be prepared to
explain why the claim should not be stayed instead.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 26, 2026
Vince Chhabria
United States District Judge
22
