Moreno v. City of Porterville et al

Filing 23

JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE NOVEMBER 30, 2023 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 11/15/2023. Initial Scheduling Conference set for 11/30/2023 is CONTINUED to 5/30/2024 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 7 (SKO) before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. (Kusamura, W)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Jesse J. Maddox, Bar No. 219091 jmaddox@lcwlegal.com Sue Ann Renfro, Bar No. 143122 srenfro@lcwlegal.com LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE A Professional Law Corporation 5250 North Palm Ave, Suite 310 Fresno, California 93704 Telephone: 559.256.7800 Facsimile: 559.449.4535 Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF PORTERVILLE and BRUCE SOKOLOFF Lawrence J. King, SBN 120805 kingesq@pacbell.net LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE J. KING 11 Western Avenue Petaluma, CA 94952 Telephone: (707) 769-9791 Facsimile: (707) 769-9253 Attorney for Plaintiff ANA ISABEL MORENO 13 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - FRESNO 16 ANA ISABEL MORENO, 17 18 19 20 21 Plaintiff. v. CITY OF PORTERVILLE and BRUCE SOKOLOFF, None. Defendant. Case No.: 1:23-cv-00541 JLT SKO Complaint Filed: April 6, 2023 FAC Filed: August 14, 2023 SAC Filed: September 6, 2023 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE NOVEMBER 30, 2023 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TO THE COURT AND TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Plaintiff ANA ISABEL MORENO (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants CITY OF PORTERVILLE and BRUCE SOKOLOFF (collectively referred to as “Defendants”), hereby stipulate to continue the FRCP 16 Scheduling Conference set for November 30, 2023. 1 30 Order re Joint Stipulation to Continue Scheduling Conference 31 12231972.1 PO090-042 1 2 3 4 5 6 WHEREAS, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on September 27, 2023 [Document 20]; WHEREAS, the parties received service of the Court’s October 3, 2023, Minute Order [Document 21] advising of a multiple month delay before a decision on the Motion to Dismiss; WHEREAS, counsel are considering but have not yet agreed to stipulate to Magistrate jurisdiction; 7 WHEREAS, even if the parties agree to Magistrate jurisdiction, the status of the pleadings 8 renders the November 30, 2023, Scheduling Conference premature to make decisions on the case; 9 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between Plaintiff and 10 Defendants, through their respective counsels of record, and the parties respectfully request the 11 Court continue the FRCP 16 Scheduling Conference from November 30, 2023, to such other date 12 at least six months from November 30, 2023, and as is convenient for the Court. 13 14 Dated: November 14, 2023 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE By: /s/ Sue Ann Renfro Jesse J. Maddox Sue Ann Renfro Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF PORTERVILLE and BRUCE SOKOLOFF 15 16 17 18 19 Dated: November 14, 2023 LAW OFFICE OF LARENCE J. KING 20 By: /s/ Lawrence J. King Lawrence J. King Attorneys for Plaintiff ANA ISABEL ORENO 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 30 Order re Joint Stipulation to Continue Scheduling Conference 31 12231972.1 PO090-042 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - FRESNO 3 ANA ISABEL MORENO, Case No.: 1:23-cv-00541 JLT SKO 4 Plaintiff. 5 v. 6 7 8 CITY OF PORTERVILLE and BRUCE SOKOLOFF, None. Defendant. Complaint Filed: April 6, 2023 FAC Filed: August 14, 2023 SAC Filed: September 6, 2023 ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE (Doc. 22) 9 10 ORDER 11 12 For good cause appearing therefore, the foregoing Stipulation IS HEREBY GRANTED. 13 The Scheduling Conference set for November 30, 2023, is hereby continued to May 30, 2024, at 14 9:30 a.m. The parties shall file their Joint Scheduling Report seven (7) days prior to the 15 Scheduling Conference. 16 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Sheila K. Oberto November 15, 2023 . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 30 Order re Joint Stipulation to Continue Scheduling Conference 31 12231972.1 PO090-042

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?