Saniefar v. Moore et al

Filing 35

STIPULATION for Further Continuance of Mandatory Scheduling Conference; ORDER: that the Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set for January 17, 2018 is continued to April 9, 2018 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 8, before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. The parties are to file their Joint Scheduling Report no later than seven days prior to the conference. signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 1/10/2018. (Herman, H)

Download PDF
1 2 3 Tanya E. Moore, SBN 206683 332 North Second Street San Jose, California 95112 Telephone (408) 298-2000 Facsimile (408) 298-6046 Email: service@mission.legal 4 5 6 7 Attorney for Defendants, Mission Law Firm, Moore Law Firm, West Coast CASp & ADA Services, Kenneth Randolph Moore, Geoshua Levinson, Rick D. Moore, Ronald D. Moore, Ronny Loreto, Elmer LeRoy Falk, and Marejka Sacks 8 11 Tanya E. Moore, SBN 206683 332 North Second Street San Jose, California 95112 Telephone (408) 298-2000 Facsimile (408) 298-6046 Email: service@mission.legal 12 Defendant in pro se 9 10 13 16 Zachary M. Best, SBN 166035 332 North Second Street San Jose, California 95112 Telephone (408) 298-2000 Facsimile (408) 298-6046 Email: service@mission.legal 17 Defendant in pro se 14 15 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 19 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 20 21 FATEMEH SANIEFAR, 22 23 24 25 26 Plaintiff, vs. RONALD D. MOORE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1:17-cv-00823-LJO-BAM STIPULATION FOR FURTHER CONTINUANCE OF MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER 27 28 WHEREAS, a Mandatory Scheduling Conference in this matter is set for January 17, 2018, having been continued from September 20, 2017 and November 28, 2017 (Dkt. 28); WHEREAS, Plaintiff, Fatemeh Saniefar (“Plaintiff”), filed her First Amended 1 2 Complaint on January 3, 2018 (Dkt. 33); 3 WHEREAS, Defendants, Kenneth Randolph Moore, Geoshua Levinson, West Coast 4 CASp & ADA Services, Rick D. Moore, Tanya E. Moore, Zachary M. Best, Mission Law Firm, 5 Moore Law Firm, Ronald D. Moore, Ronny Loreto, Elmer LeRoy Falk, and Marejka Sacks (all 6 defendants are collectively referred to herein as “Defendants,” and together with Plaintiff, “the 7 Parties”), are required to respond to the First Amended Complaint by January 19, 2018 (Dkt. 8 31); 9 WHEREAS, Defendants intend to file motions to dismiss on or before the responsive 10 pleading deadline, and the Parties desire to have those motions decided prior to moving forward 11 with the scheduling of this matter since the outcome of the motions may inform how this matter 12 proceeds and as to which (if any) Defendants; 13 NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, by and through their respective counsel, stipulate to 14 a continuance of the Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set for January 17, 2018 to a 15 date at the Court’s convenience on or after March 19, 2018 to allow time for Defendants’ 16 Motion to Dismiss to be heard and ruled on. 17 Dated: January 8, 2018 18 /s/ Moji Saniefar Moji Saniefar Attorneys for Plaintiff Fatemeh Saniefar 19 20 21 SANIEFAR LAW Dated: January 8, 2018 /s/ Tanya E. Moore Tanya E. Moore Attorney for Defendants Mission Law Firm, Moore Law Firm, West Coast CASp & ADA Services, Kenneth Randolph Moore, Geoshua Levinson, Rick D. Moore, Ronald D. Moore, Ronny Loreto, Elmer LeRoy Falk, and Marejka Sacks Dated: January 8, 2018 /s/ Tanya E. Moore Tanya E. Moore Defendant in pro se 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 Dated: January 8, 2018 /s/ Zachary M. Best Zachary M. Best Defendant in pro se 3 4 5 ORDER 6 7 The Parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing, 8 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set 9 for January 17, 2018 is continued to April 9, 2018 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 8, before 10 Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. The parties are to file their Joint Scheduling Report no 11 later than seven days prior to the conference. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 10, 2018 /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?