Weeks v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Filing
30
ORDER GRANTING 29 Request to Modify the Scheduling Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 4/6/2015. The Settlement Conference set for 4/29/2015 at 1:30 PM is VACATED. (Hall, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Charles L. Thompson, IV, CA Bar No. 139927
charles.thompson@ogletreedeakins.com
Jill V. Cartwright, CA Bar No. 260519
jill.cartwright@ogletreedeakins.com
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone:
415.442.4810
Facsimile:
415.442.4870
Attorneys for Defendant
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
TREVOR WEEKS
Case No. 13-cv-01641-AWI-JLT
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
15
16
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY,
a Delaware Corporation
Defendant.
DEFENDANT UNION PACIFIC
RAILROAD COMPANY’S REQUEST TO
MODIFY THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING
ORDER TO CONTINUE THE
MANDATORY SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE AND ORDER
(Doc. 29)
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 13-cv-01641-AWI-JLT
DEFENDANT UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY’S REQUEST TO MODIFY THE PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING ORDER TO CONTINUE THE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND
ORDER
1
Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company (“UPRR”) respectfully requests the Court
2
modify its Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 11) to continue the April 29, 2015 mandatory
3
settlement conference with Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston until after the Court rules on
4
UPRR’s Motion for Summary Judgment, or Alternatively, Partial Summary Judgment. (ECF No.
5
25) (the “Motion”). On March 2, 2015, UPRR filed the Motion and noticed a hearing for April 6,
6
2015. Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c), Plaintiff’s Opposition was due March 23, 2015, two weeks
7
before the hearing date. Plaintiff did not file an opposition to the Motion. On March 30, 2015,
8
UPRR filed a Reply regarding the Motion. (ECF No. 26). On March 31, 2015, the Court vacated
9
the hearing and set the matter for decision on the papers. (ECF No. 28).
10
Given Plaintiff’s failure to oppose the Motion, UPRR respectfully requests the Court vacate
11
the upcoming settlement conference and schedule it after the Court rules on the Motion. This will
12
help promote judicial economy because the parties will not be forced to attend a settlement
13
conference while an unopposed summary judgment motion is pending.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
DATED: April 6, 2015
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.
By:
/s/ Jill V. Cartwright
Charles L. Thompson, IV
Jill V. Cartwright
Attorneys for Defendant
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
Case No. 13-cv-01641-AWI-JLT
DEFENDANT UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY’S REQUEST TO MODIFY THE PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING ORDER TO CONTINUE THE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND
ORDER
1
ORDER
2
Because Defendant indicates it is not in a position to discuss settlement until after it
3
receives a ruling on its dispositive motion, the April 29, 2015 settlement conference is
4
VACATED. If, in the future, the settlement posture of the case changes, counsel may file a joint
5
request that a settlement conference be placed on calendar.
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
April 6, 2015
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No. 13-cv-01641-AWI-JLT
DEFENDANT UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY’S REQUEST TO MODIFY THE PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING ORDER TO CONTINUE THE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND
ORDER
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?