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)

Download PDF
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?