Figueroa, et al. v. City of Fresno
Filing
8
STIPULATION and ORDER to Reschedule Status Conference: the Telephonic Status Conference regarding assignment to a Sacramento District Judge or Consent is continued from April 2, 2015 to April 30, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. before Judge McAuliffe. signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 3/27/2015. (Herman, H)
1
5
ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ (CA SBN 121490)
AGonzalez@mofo.com
ALEXANDRIA A. AMEZCUA (CA SBN 247507)
AAmezcua@mofo.com
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: 415.268.7000
Facsimile: 415.268.7522
6
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
7
11
BRUCE D. PRAET (SBN 119430)
BPraet@aol.com
G. CRAIG SMITH (SBN 265676)
FERGUSON, PRAET & SHERMAN
A Professional Corporation
1631 East 18th Street
Santa Ana, California 92705
(714) 953-5300 Telephone
(714) 953-1143 Facsimile
12
Attorneys for Defendants
2
3
4
8
9
10
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16
17
18
AURORA FIGUEROA, on her own behalf,
and as successor in interest to MARTIN
FIGUEROA, and LIZETTE FIGUEROA, on
her own behalf,
Plaintiffs,
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
v.
CITY OF FRESNO, a municipal
corporation, and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive,
Defendants.
Case No. 1:15-cv-00349 --BAM
STIPULATION AND
ORDER TO RESCHEDULE
STATUS CONFERENCE_
1
Plaintiff Aurora Figueroa, on her own behalf, and as successor in interest to
2
Martin Figueroa, and Lizette Figueroa, on her own behalf (together, “Plaintiffs”)
3
and Defendant CITY OF FRESNO (“Defendant”), by and through their respective
4
counsel, jointly stipulate as follows:
5
6
7
8
9
10
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against
Defendant (D.E. 1);
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2015, Plaintiffs served the complaint on Defendant
(D.E. 4);
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2015, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint
(D.E. 5);
11
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2015, the Courtroom Deputy issued a minute
12
order setting a status conference regarding assignment to a Sacramento District
13
Judge, for April 2, 2015, at 9 a.m. (D.E. 6);
14
WHEREAS, in light of Plaintiffs’ counsel’s previously-scheduled travel
15
obligations to be out of the country the week of March 30, 2015, Plaintiffs have
16
requested, and Defendant has consented, to reschedule the status conference to
17
April 30, at 9 a.m.; and
18
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ counsel spoke with the Courtroom Deputy on
19
March 25, 2015, and confirmed that such time and date is available for the status
20
conference;
21
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties,
22
through their counsel, subject to the Court’s approval, that the status conference
23
shall be rescheduled from April 2, 2015 to April 30, 2015, at 9 a.m.
24
25
26
27
28
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order
2
1
Dated:
March 26, 2015
2
3
4
ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ
ALEXANDRIA A. AMEZCUA
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By: /s/Alexandria A. Amezcua
Alexandria A. Amezcua
5
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
6
7
Dated:
March 26, 2015
8
9
BRUCE D. PRAET
FERGUSON, PRAET & SHERMAN
1631 East 18th Street
Santa Ana, California 92705
10
11
By: /s/Bruce D. Praet
Bruce D. Praet
12
13
Attorneys for Defendants
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order
3
1
ECF ATTESTATION
I, Alexandria A. Amezcua, am the ECF User whose ID and password are
2
3
being used to file the following: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
4
TO RESCHEDULE STATUS CONFERENCE. In compliance with Local Rule
5
5-4.3.4, I hereby attest that Bruce D. Praet has concurred in this filing.
6
Dated:
March 26, 2015
7
8
9
ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ
ALEXANDRIA A. AMEZCUA
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By: /s/Alexandria A. Amezcua
Alexandria A. Amezcua
10
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
11
12
ORDER
13
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED that the Telephonic
14
15
Status Conference regarding assignment to a Sacramento District Judge or
16
Consent is continued from April 2, 2015 to April 30, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. before
17
Judge McAuliffe.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated:
March 27, 2015
/s/ Barbara
A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?