Wagner et al v. County of Inyo

Filing 6

STIPULATION and ORDER 5 to Continue Mandatory Scheduling Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 9/29/2017. Initial Scheduling Conference CONTINUED to 12/21/2017 at 08:45 AM in Bakersfield, 510 19th Street before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

AMANDA WAGNER and HEATHER LIND, ) Case No. 1:17-cv-00969-DAD-JLT
on behalf of themselves and all similarly
)
situated individuals,
) STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
) MANDATORY SCHEDULING
Plaintiffs,
) CONFERENCE; ORDER THEREON
v.
)
)
COUNTY OF INYO,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
The undersigned represent the named parties to this action and, by signing this
stipulation, each and every party to this action agrees to the following:

19

WHEREAS, on July 20, 2017, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all similarly

20

situated individuals, brought this action against Defendant alleging violations of the Fair Labor

21

Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq.

22

WHEREAS, on July 20, 2017, the Court issued an Order Setting Mandatory Scheduling

23

Conference in this action for October 18, 2017, and ordering the parties to file a Joint Scheduling

24

Report on or before October 11, 2017, and further ordering the parties to conduct a Rule 26(f)

25

conference on or before September 28, 2017 that is to include discussion of potential settlement.

26

WHEREAS, the parties are meeting and conferring over filing a stipulation for

27

conditional certification of this case as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) and

28

Hoffmann-La Roche v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 (1989) and facilitating notice to similarly situated
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

1

Wagner, et al. v. County of Inyo
Case No.: 1:17-cv-00969-DAD-JLT

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

individuals. It is the intent of the parties, that through this stipulation, it will ensure an efficient
resolution of the claims alleged in this action for Plaintiffs and any other individuals that may be
similarly situated as well as adjudication of Defendant’s liability, if any, as alleged. (See 29
U.S.C. § 216(b), See also Hoffmann-La Roche v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 (1989).)
WHEREAS, the parties agree that in order to conserve the resources of the Court, and
enable the parties to complete negotiation over a stipulation for conditional certification and
settlement discussions that may obviate the need to engage in further litigation, good cause exists
to continue the Mandatory Scheduling Conference, and related deadlines, for at least 60 days to
allow the parties to pursue their stipulation.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, that:
a) The Mandatory Scheduling Conference shall be continued to, at the earliest,
December 18, 2017, or such date thereafter that is convenient for the Court; and
b) The parties’ Joint Scheduling Report shall be filed no later than seven (7) days prior to
the rescheduled Mandatory Scheduling Conference; and
c) The deadline for the parties to conduct a Rule 26(f) conference shall be extended to at
least twenty (20) days before the rescheduled Mandatory Scheduling Conference.

17
18
19

Respectfully submitted,
Dated: September 27 2017

By: /s/ Ace. T. Tate
DAVID E. MASTAGNI, ESQ.
ISAAC S. STEVENS, ESQ.
ACE T. TATE, ESQ.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

20
21
22
23

MASTAGNI HOLSTEDT, APC

Dated: September 27, 2017

24
25

ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD &
ROMO
By: /s/ Nate J. Kowalksi
NATE J. KOWLASKI, ESQ.
Attorneys for Defendant

26
27
28
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

2

Wagner, et al. v. County of Inyo
Case No.: 1:17-cv-00969-DAD-JLT

1
2
3

ORDER
Based on the stipulation of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1.

4
5

8:45 a.m. before the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, Magistrate Judge;
2.

6
7

The Mandatory Scheduling Conference is continued to December 21, 2017 at

The parties’ Joint Scheduling Report shall be filed no later than seven (7) days
prior to the Mandatory Scheduling Conference; and

3.

8

The parties SHALL conduct a Rule 26(f) conference no later than
November 27, 2017.

9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 29, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

3

Wagner, et al. v. County of Inyo
Case No.: 1:17-cv-00969-DAD-JLT