Cabardo et al v. Patacsil et al
Filing
73
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/9/18, ORDERING that the trial is CONTINUED to 1/28/2019 at 09:00 AM and the Final Pretrial Conference is CONTINUED to 11/15/2018 at 02:00 PM, BOTH in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley. The Joint Pretrial Conference Statement is DUE on 11/8/2018. (Kastilahn, A)
1
7
STAN S. MALLISON (Bar No. 184191)
StanM@TheMMLawFirm.com
HECTOR R. MARTINEZ (Bar No. 206336)
HectorM@TheMMLawFirm.com
MARCO A. PALAU (Bar. No. 242340)
MPalau@TheMMLawFirm.com
JOSEPH D. SUTTON (Bar No. 269951)
JSutton@TheMMLawFirm.com
MALLISON & MARTINEZ
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 730
Oakland, California 94612-3547
Telephone: (510) 832-9999
Facsimile: (510) 832-1101
8
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
2
3
4
5
6
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA—SACRAMENTO DIVISION
12
13
14
15
16
17
JOSEPH CABARDO, DONNABEL SUYAT,
MACTABE BIBAT, MARISSA BIBAT,
ALICIA BOLLING, RENATO MANIPON,
CARLINA CABACONGAN, AND JOHN
DAVE CABACONGAN, on behalf of all current
and former employees and the State of California
20
21
22
PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO
CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE AND
ORDER
Plaintiffs,
18
19
Case No.: 2:12-CV-01705-TLN-KJN
vs.
MARILYN PATACSIL AND ERNESTO
PATACSIL
Defendants.
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE AND ORDER
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01705-TLN-KJN
1
2
TO THIS HONORABLE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF
RECORD:
3
Plaintiffs JOSEPH CABARDO, DONNABEL SUYAT, MACTABE BIBAT, MARISSA
4
BIBAT, ALICIA BOLLING, RENATO MANIPON, CARLINA CABACONGAN, AND JOHN
5
DAVE CABACONGAN (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants MARILYN PATACSIL AND ERNESTO
6
PATACSIL (“Defendants”) (collectively the “parties”), by and through their counsel of record,
7
hereby stipulate as follows:
8
9
Whereas the parties respectfully submit that good cause exists for continuing the existing
trial date in this matter;
10
Whereas the parties have not sought a prior continuance of the trial date in this matter;
11
Whereas Plaintiffs’ counsel has another trial that has now been set for May 21, 2018 in
12
state court and represents that two concurrent jury trials (this one with eight plaintiffs) is overly
13
burdensome for its practice;
14
15
Whereas Defense counsel represents that it has a highly impacted litigation calendar from
July 2018 through October 2018; and
16
Whereas the parties remain committed to participating in good faith in the April 9, 2018
17
Settlement Conference with Magistrate Delaney that this Court set due, in part, to the congestion
18
of its trial court calendar.
19
20
THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate to and propose a continuance of the existing
trial date to November 14, 2018, or a date thereafter that is amenable to the Court and the parties.
21
22
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE AND ORDER
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01705-TLN-KJN
1
Respectfully submitted,
2
3
DATED: March 30, 2018
MALLISON & MARTINEZ
4
By:
5
/s/
Joseph D. Sutton
Stan S. Mallison
Hector R. Martinez
Marco A. Palau
Joseph D. Sutton
6
7
8
9
10
DATED: March 30, 2018
LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL B. LEVIN
11
12
13
By:
/s/
Michael B. Levin
Michael B. Levin
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE AND ORDER
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01705-TLN-KJN
1
2
3
ORDER
Good cause appearing, the Court hereby Grants the Parties’ Stipulation to Continue the
Trial Date in this matter is GRANTED.
4
The trial date is set for January 28, 2019, at 9:00 a.m.
5
The Final Pretrial Conference is set for November 15, 2018 at 2:00 p.m., with the Joint
6
Pretrial Conference Statement due on November 8, 2018.
7
8
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
10
Dated: April 9, 2018
11
12
13
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
PARTIES’ STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE AND ORDER
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01705-TLN-KJN
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?