Singh v. Hauser et al

Filing 54

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 53 Stipulation filed by Mario Canton, John P. Morgan, Linda G. Hauser, Raghbir Singh. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte on December 17, 2008. (edllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/17/2008)

Download PDF
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 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP JON B. STREETER - #101970, jstreeter@kvn.com KHARI J. TILLERY - #215669, ktillery@kvn.com ROSE DARLING - #243893, rdarling@kvn.com 710 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 Telephone: (415) 391-5400 Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 Attorneys for Plaintiff RAGHBIR SINGH JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO­ #44332 United States Attorney JOANN M. SWANSON - # 88143 Chief, Civil Division MICHAEL T. PYLE - # 172954, michael.t.pyle@usdoj.gov Assistant United States Attorney 450 Golden Gate Avenue 9th Floor, Box 36055 San Francisco, CA 94102-3495 Telephone: (415) 436-7322 Facsimile: (415) 436-6748 Attorneys for Defendants LINDA HAUSER, MARIO CANTON & JOHN P. MORGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION RAGHBIR SINGH, Plaintiff, v. LINDA G. HAUSER, MARIO CANTON, JOHN P. MORGAN, NATIONAL COMMAND LINK NETWORK 20, AND DOES 1-25, Defendants. Case No. C-07-2997 EDL STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME TO COMPLETE SETTLEMENT Judge: The Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte June 8, 2007 Date Comp. Filed: Trial Date: 431745.01 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME TO COMPLETE SETTLEMENT Case No. C-07-2997 EDL 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. RECITAL On August 4, 2008, the parties participated in a mediation before Daniel Bowling and reached a settlement agreement. On September 18, the Court issued an order dismissing this case without prejudice, and with leave to reinstate on or before 90 days for the purpose of proceeding with the litigation in the event the parties did not complete the settlement prior to that date. Since the conclusion of the mediation, the parties have worked diligently to finalize the settlement, but the process has taken longer than expected. The primary reason for this delay has been protracted negotiations with NCLN20, a former party to this litigation, regarding the language of a mutual release of claims between NCLN20 and the remaining defendants. We are now on the verge reaching agreement on language of the mutual release, but it will take some additional time for the proper governmental agencies to approve the new language. Given that we are on the verge of settlement, the parties agree that it would be a waste of the Court's resources for the plaintiff Raghbir Singh to reinstate his complaint in order to avoid dismissal with prejudice. The parties believe that the settlement will be finalized no later than January 30, 2009. STIPULATION For the forgoing reasons, plaintiff Singh and defendants Linda Hauser, Mario Canton, and John Morgan, through their undersigned counsel, stipulate and agree to extend the time to complete the settlement from December 18, 2008 to January 30, 2009. 1 431745.01 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME TO COMPLETE SETTLEMENT Case No. C-07-2997 EDL 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 Dated: December 17, 2008 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP By: /s/ Khari J. Tillery KHARI J. TILLERY Attorneys for Plaintiff RAGHBIR SINGH Dated: December 17, 2008 JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO United States Attorney By: /s/ Michael T. Pyle [Concurrence Obtained General Order 45 § X.B] Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendants IT IS SO ORDERED. UNIT ED S ISTRIC ES D TC AT T 17 Dated: December __, 2008 ER N F D IS T IC T O R 2 431745.01 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME TO COMPLETE SETTLEMENT Case No. C-07-2997 EDL A C LI FO D. La THE HONORABLEzaELIZIBETH LAPORTE li beth Judge E porte R NIA O IT IS S ORDER ED RT U O NO RT H

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?