Board of Trustees Of The United Food And Commercial Workers National Health And Welfare Fund v. Gibson Wine Company
Filing
27
STIPULATION to Continue Mandatory Scheduling Conference; ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 2/10/2015. Initial Scheduling Conference currently set for 2/17/2015 is CONTINUED to 3/19/2015 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 10 (GSA) before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin. (Martinez, A)
1
2
3
Henry Y. Chiu, #222927
Tucker, Chiu, Hebesha & Ward PC
642 Pollasky Avenue, Suite 230
Clovis, California 93612
Telephone: (559) 472-9922
Facsimile: (559) 472-9892
4
Attorneys for Plaintiff
5
6
7
8
9
Justin T. Campagne, #211825
Wiley R. Driskill, #253913
Campagne, Campagne & Lerner
A Professional Corporation
Airport Office Center
1685 North Helm Avenue
Fresno, California 93727
Telephone: (559) 255-1637
Facsimile: (559) 252-9617
10
Attorneys for Defendant Gibson Wine Company
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL
WORKERS NATIONAL HEALTH AND
WELFARE FUND,
) Case No. 1:14-CV-01366-AWI-GSA
)
) STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
) MANDATORY SCHEDULING
) CONFERENCE; ORDER
Plaintiff,
)
) Currently Set Date: February 17, 2015
v.
) Currently Set Time: 10:00 a.m.
) Courtroom: 10 (Hon. Mag. Judge Austin)
GIBSON WINE COMPANY, and DOES 1 )
through 50,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
1
WHEREAS, Plaintiff Board of Trustees of the United Food and
2
Commercial Workers National Health and Welfare Fund (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant
3
Gibson Wine Company (“Defendant,” and together with Plaintiff, “the Parties”) stipulated
4
to service wherein Defendant’s response to the Complaint was due on or before January
5
29, 2015;
6
WHEREAS, the Defendant has filed a Petition to Compel Arbitration,
7
which is currently scheduled to be heard by the Honorable Judge Ishii at 1:30 p.m. on
8
March 2, 2015;
9
WHEREAS, the Mandatory Scheduling Conference is currently set before
10
the Honorable Magistrate Judge Austin for 10:00 a.m. on February 17, 2015, and the
11
Mandatory Joint Scheduling Conference Statement must therefore be filed on or before
12
February 10, 2015;
13
14
WHEREAS, due to the aforementioned time to respond and the filing of the
Defendant’s Petition, the Defendant has not yet filed an answer to the complaint;
15
WHEREAS, the parties intend to engage in meaningful settlement
16
negotiations, which may soon also include early mediation and/or settlement conference,
17
and wish to avoid incurring additional fees and unnecessarily utilizing judicial resources
18
while they explore, and hopefully finalize, a settlement;
19
20
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, by and through their respective counsel,
hereby stipulate as follows:
21
1.
That the Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set for
22
February 17, 2015 be continued to a date on or after March 17, 2015, at the Court’s
23
convenience.
24
Dated: February 10, 2015
Campagne, Campagne & Lerner
A Professional Corporation
25
26
27
By /s/ Wiley R. Driskill
Wiley R. Driskill
Attorneys for Defendant Gibson Wine Co.
28
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Page 1
1
Dated: February 10, 2015
Tucker, Chiu, Hebesha & Ward PC
2
By /s/ Henry Y. Chiu
Henry Y. Chiu
Attorneys for Plaintiff Board of Trustees,
UFCW National Health and Welfare Fund
3
4
5
6
ORDER
7
The Parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing,
8
IT IS ORDERED that the Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set
9
for February 17, 2015, is continued to March 19, 2015, in Courtroom 10 at 10:30 a.m. The
10
Scheduling Conference Statement is to be filed no more than seven (7) days prior to the
11
date of the conference.
12
13
14
15
16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
February 10, 2015
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Page 2
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?