Andrew et al v. City of Sacramento et al
Filing
53
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 6/3/20 ORDERING that the deadline for the Parties to file final disposition documents shall be extended to August 31, 2020. (Kaminski, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
DAVID P. MASTAGNI, ESQ. (SBN 57721)
david@mastagni.com
ISAAC S. STEVENS, ESQ. (SBN 251245)
istevens@mastagni.com
MASTAGNI HOLSTEDT
A Professional Corporation
1912 “I” Street
Sacramento, California 95811-3151
Telephone: (916) 446-4692
Facsimile: (916) 447-4614
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
CHRIS ANDREW and RICHARD MAYBERRY
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
CHRIS ANDREW and RICHARD
MAYBERRY, suing individually and by and
on behalf of all others similarly situated,
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 2:17-cv-02266-JAM-KJN
JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
DEADLINE TO FILE DISPOSITION
DOCUMENTS
Hon. John A. Mendez
CITY OF SACRAMENTO; NATIONWIDE
INVESTMENT SERVICES CORPORATION,
an Ohio Corporation; INTERNATIONAL
CITY/COUNTY MANAGERS
ASSOCIATION-RETIREMENT
CORPORATION, a District of Columbia
Company,
Defendants.
20
21
As set forth in the Court’s June 21, 2018 Minute Order (Doc. No. 28), Plaintiffs Chris
22
Andrew and Richard Mayberry, and Defendants City of Sacramento (the “City”), Nationwide
23
Investment Services Corporation (“Nationwide”), and International City/County Managers
24
Association-Retirement Corporation (“ICMA RC”) (collectively, “Parties”) reached a settlement
25
in principal during the June 21, 2018 settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Claire.
26
As previously reported to this Court, the Parties’ signed settlement agreement requires
27
independent fiduciary review prior to the Parties’ filing of dispositional documents.
28
independent fiduciary review is not yet complete. The Parties are simply waiting for the fiduciary
This
JOINT STIPULATION RE: DEADLINE TO FILE DISPOSITION DOCUMENTS;
CASE NO. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-KJN
1
to complete its review, however events caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic have caused further
2
unanticipated delays. For this reason, the Parties again request that the deadline to file final
3
disposition documents be extended to August 31, 2020, in order to carry out certain terms of the
4
settlement agreement.
5
The June 21, 2018 Minute Order set forth a deadline of September 26, 2018 for the Parties
6
to file final disposition documents. On September 24, 2018, the Parties filed a stipulation
7
requesting the deadline to file final disposition documents be extended to November 16, 2018.
8
(Doc. No. 29). That stipulated request was granted by the Court on September 25, 2018. (Doc.
9
No. 30). On November 15, the Parties filed a second stipulation requesting that the deadline to file
10
final disposition documents be extended to February 22, 2019. (Doc. No. 33). The second
11
stipulated request was granted by the Court on November 16, 2018. (Doc. No. 34). On February
12
20, 2019, the Parties filed a third stipulation requesting that the deadline to file final disposition
13
documents be extended to April 19, 2019. (Doc. No. 35). The third stipulated request was granted
14
by the Court on February 21, 2019. (Doc. No. 36). On April 17, 2019, the Parties filed a fourth
15
stipulation requesting additional time to July 19, 2019. (Doc. No. 37). That stipulation was granted
16
by the Court on April 18, 2019. (Doc. No. 38). On July 18, 2019, the Parties filed a fifth stipulation
17
requesting additional time to August 30, 2019. (Doc. No. 40). That stipulation was granted by the
18
Court on July 19, 2019. (Doc. No. 41). On August 30, 2019, the Parties filed a sixth stipulation
19
requesting additional time to October 16, 2019. (Doc. No. 42). That stipulation was granted by
20
the Court on September 3, 2019. (Doc. No. 43). On October 17, 2019 the Parties filed a seventh
21
stipulation requesting additional time to November 22, 2019. (Doc. No. 44). That stipulation was
22
granted by the Court on October 17, 2019. (Doc. No. 45). On November 25, 2019, the Parties filed
23
an eighth stipulation requesting additional time to December 20, 2019. (Doc. No. 46). That
24
stipulation was granted by the Court on November 25, 2019. (Doc. No. 47). On December 20,
25
2019, the Parties filed a ninth stipulation requesting additional time to March 4, 2020. (Doc. No.
26
48). That stipulation was granted by the Court on December 26, 2020. (Doc. No. 49). On March
27
5, 2020, the Parties filed a tenth stipulation requesting additional time to June2, 2020. (Doc. No.
28
50). That stipulation was granted by the Court on March 5, 2020. (Doc. No. 51).
2
JOINT STIPULATION RE: DEADLINE TO FILE DISPOSITION DOCUMENTS;
CASE NO. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-KJN
1
Dated: June 3, 2020
2
Respectfully submitted,
MAYER BROWN, LLP
3
4
By: /s/ Andrew Z. Edelstein (as authorized
6/3/20)
Andrew Z. Edelstein
Attorneys for Defendant
INTERNATIONAL CITY/COUNTY
MANAGERS ASSOCIATION-RETIREMENT
CORPORATION
5
6
7
8
Dated: June 3, 2020
Respectfully submitted,
9
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
10
11
By: /s/ Susannah K. Howard (as authorized
6/3/20)
Susannah K. Howard
Attorneys for Defendant
NATIONWIDE INVESTMENT SERVICES
CORPORATION
12
13
14
15
Dated: June 3, 2020
16
Respectfully submitted,
MASTAGNI HOLSTEDT, APC
17
18
By: /s/ Isaac S. Stevens
Isaac S. Stevens
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
CHRIS ANDREW and RICHARD
MAYBERRY
19
20
21
22
Dated: June 3, 2020
Respectfully submitted,
BUCHALTER
23
24
25
By: /s/ Kevin T. Collins (as authorized 6/3/20)
Kevin T. Collins
Attorneys for Defendant
CITY OF SACRAMENTO
26
27
28
3
JOINT STIPULATION RE: DEADLINE TO FILE DISPOSITION DOCUMENTS;
CASE NO. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-KJN
1
2
ORDER
3
IT IS SO ORDERED. The deadline for the Parties to file final disposition documents shall be
4
extended to August 31, 2020.
5
Dated: June 3, 2020
6
/s/ John A. Mendez
Hon. John A. Mendez
United States District Court Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
732117258
JOINT STIPULATION RE: DEADLINE TO FILE DISPOSITION DOCUMENTS;
CASE NO. 2:17-CV-02266-JAM-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?