Cherry et al v. The City College of San Francisco et al

Filing 829

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE STATUS CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge Alsup on March 26, 2009. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/26/2009)

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

GUY B. WALLACE (State Bar No. 176151) MARK T. JOHNSON (State Bar No. 076904) SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL BRAYTON KONECKY LLP 180 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] TTY: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARGIE CHERRY and ESTORIA CHERRY, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs.

No. C-04-4981 WHA CLASS ACTION STIPULATION AND [proposed] ORDER RE STATUS CONFERENCE Date: April 2, 2009 Time: 11 a.m. Place: Courtroom 9

THE CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FRANCISCO, et al., Defendants.

Cherry, et al. v. City College, et. al., C-04-4981 WHA Stipulation & [proposed] Order Re Status Conference

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 HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through their counsel of record, and subject to the approval of the Court, that the Status Conference currently set for April 2, 2009 be continued for a period of approximately 45 days. Good cause for such a continuance exists as Plaintiffs have proposed a meeting of counsel and City College officials prior to the status conference to discuss issues related to the Progress Report recently submitted by City College. The parties agree that the Status Conference would be more productive and more informative for the Court if it occurred after such a meeting, which will need to be scheduled. In addition, Class Counsel is not available for a Status Conference on the date for which it is currently scheduled, April 2, 2009. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that this Court continue the Status Conference for a period of approximately 45 days to a date in May, 2009. Dated: March 23, 2009 SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL BRAYTON KONECKY LLP _________/s/___________________________ MARK T. JOHNSON Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: March 23, 2009 STUBBS & LEONE _________/s/___________________________ KATHLEEN M. DARMAGNAC Attorneys for Defendants

Per General Order No. 45 § X B., I attest that Ms. Kathleen M. Darmagnac, Esq., has concurred in the filing of this document. Dated: March 23, 2009 SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL BRAYTON KONECKY LLP /s/___________________________ MARK T. JOHNSON Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Cherry, et al. v. City College, et. al., C-04-4981 WHA Stipulation & [proposed] Order Re Status Conference 1

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 26 DATED: March ___, 2009 IT IS SO ORDERED.

ORDER Pursuant to Stipulation, and good cause appearing, the Status Conference is continued to 11 MayApril 30 2009, at ____ a.m. ______,

UNIT ED

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

ER HON. WILLIAM H. ALSUP C N United States District Judge F O

D IS T IC T R

Cherry, et al. v. City College, et. al., C-04-4981 WHA Stipulation & [proposed] Order Re Status Conference 2

A

LI

lsup illiam A Judge W ___________________________________

FO

R NIA

O OR IT IS S

DERED

RT U O

NO

RT

H