Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Company, Inc. et al

Filing 98

ORDER Further Case Management Conference set for 1/28/2011 03:00 PM. (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/10/2010)

Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Company, Inc. et al

Doc. 98

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Sara B. Brody (SBN 130222) Cecilia Y. Chan (SBN 240971) SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 555 California Street San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants TRAINER WORTHAM & COMPANY, INC., DAVID P. COMO, FIRST REPUBLIC BANK and ROBERT VILE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION HEIDE BETZ Plaintiff, vs. TRAINER WORTHAM & COMPANY, INC., DAVID P. COMO, FIRST REPUBLIC BANK and ROBERT VILE Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 03-03231 SI STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CMC; CASE NO. C 03-03231 SI

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WHEREAS, on April 5, 2005, this Court granted Defendants' motion for summary judgment and entered judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff in the abovecaptioned case; WHEREAS, Plaintiff appealed from this Court's order granting judgment in favor of Defendants; WHEREAS, following the appeal to the Ninth Circuit, Defendants petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari; WHEREAS, on May 3, 2010, the Supreme Court granted Defendants' petition and, at the same time, remanded this case to the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Merck & Co. v. Reynolds, 559 U.S. ___ (2010); WHEREAS, on July 7, 2010, the Ninth Circuit issued an order remanding this case to this Court for further proceedings; WHEREAS, Plaintiff sought an en banc rehearing on the Ninth Circuit's order to remand this case; WHEREAS, on September 1, 2010, the Ninth Circuit denied Plaintiff's petition for rehearing en banc; WHEREAS, the Ninth Circuit's formal mandate was issued on September 9, 2010; WHEREAS, on October 25, 2010, this Court set a case management conference on November 10, 2010, at 3:00 p.m.; WHEREAS, due to scheduling conflicts, counsel for the parties are not available on that date; WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred and have agreed to continue the November 10, 2010 case management conference to January 28, 2011, at 3:00 p.m. THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by Plaintiff and Defendants, through their respective counsel of record, as follows: 1. The case management conference currently scheduled for November 10, 2010,

at 3:00 p.m. should be vacated and rescheduled to January 28, 2011, at 3:00 p.m.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CMC; CASE NO. C 03-03231 SI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Respectfully submitted, DATED: November 2, 2010 SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP

/s/ Sara B. Brody SARA B. BRODY CECILIA Y. CHAN Attorneys for Defendants
TRAINER WORTHAM & COMPANY, INC., DAVID P. COMO, FIRST REPUBLIC BANK and ROBERT VILE

DATED: November 2, 2010

Schwartz & Schwartz

/s/ Theodore Schwartz Theodore Schwartz Attorneys for Plaintiff
HEIDI BETZ SIGNATURE ATTESTATION Pursuant to General Order No. 45(X)(B), I hereby attest that I have on file written permission to sign this joint motion from all parties whose signatures are indicated by a conformed signature (/s/) within this e-filed document.

/s/ Sara B. Brody
ORDER PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ____________________

__________________________________________

The Honorable Susan Illston United States District Court
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING CMC; CASE NO. C 03-03231 SI