Chapman v. Valero California Retail Company et al

Filing 8

ORDER continued the Initial Scheduling Conference currently set for 8/5/2010 to 9/8/2010 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 10 (GSA) before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 7/27/2010. (Kusamura, W)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Lynn Hubbard, III, SBN 69773 Scottlynn J Hubbard, IV, SBN 212970 DISABLED ADVOCACY GROUP, APLC 12 Williamsburg Lane Chico, CA 95926 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Byron Chapman, Plaintiff, vs. Valero California Retail Company dba Valero Corner Store #3006, et al., Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 1:10-cv-00758-LJO-GSA Plaintiff's Request to Continue the Scheduling Conference and Order Thereon Date: August 5, 2010 Time: 9:30 a.m. Ctrm: 10, 6th Floor

Chapman v. Valero California Retail Company, et al., Case No. 1:10-cv-00758-LJO-GSA Plaintiff's Request to Continue the Scheduling Conference

Page 1 PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Plaintiff hereby requests that the date for the Scheduling Conference, currently scheduled for August 5, 2010, be continued to September 8, 2010, or in the alternative, a date convenient for the court. Plaintiff makes this request based on the fact that defendant, Valero California Retail Company dba Valero Corner Store #3006 ("Valero"), was served on July 21, 2010, but has not yet appeared. Defendant Valero's answer to the complaint is due on or before August 11, 2010. Additionally, upon receipt of a letter from counsel for Valero, Plaintiff anticipates voluntarily dismissing the Pierucci defendants. If the Scheduling Conference is continued, it would allow plaintiff and defendant time to properly meet and confer concerning the Joint Scheduling Report by August 20, 2010, and subsequently file the Joint Scheduling Report by September 2, 2010. Therefore, plaintiff respectively submits that it would be counter productive to file a status report or hold a status conference at this time. Dated: July 26, 2010 DISABLED ADVOCACY GROUP, APLC /s/ Lynn Hubbard III LYNN HUBBARD III Attorney for Plaintiff ORDER GOOD CAUSE HAVING BEEN SHOWN, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the scheduling conference be continued to September 8, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. with the Joint Scheduling Report to be filed seven (7) days prior to the conference. Dated: _July 27, 2010 _/s/ GARY S. AUSTIN_____________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Chapman v. Valero California Retail Company, et al., Case No. 1:10-cv-00758-LJO-GSA Plaintiff's Request to Continue the Scheduling Conference

Page 2 PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com