Singh v. Hauser et al

Filing 56

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 55 Stipulation filed by Mario Canton, John P. Morgan, Linda G. Hauser, Raghbir Singh. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte on January 29, 2009. (edllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2009)

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: 435048.01 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 RECITAL On August 4, 2008, the parties participated in a mediation before Daniel Bowling and reached a settlement agreement. On September 18, 2008, 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. On December 17, 2008, the Court granted the parties' stipulated request to extend the time to complete the settlement to January 30, 2009. Since the extension of time was granted, the parties have worked diligently to finalize the settlement, but the process has taken longer than expected. The primary reason for the delay continues to be 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. The parties and NCLN20 are now on the verge reaching agreement on language of the mutual release, but need some additional time. The parties further 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 March 31, 2009. STIPULATION For the foregoing 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 January 30, 2009 to March 31, 2009. 1 435048.01 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. Dated: January 28, 2009 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP By: /s/ Khari J. Tillery KHARI J. TILLERY Attorneys for Plaintiff RAGHBIR SINGH Dated: January 28, 2009 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. 29 Dated: January __, 2009 S S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O UNIT ED ER N F D IS T IC T O R 2 435048.01 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME TO COMPLETE SETTLEMENT Case No. C-07-2997 EDL A C LI FO Judge E lizabeth D. Lapo rte R NIA THE HONORABLE ELIZIBETH LAPORTE NO OO IT IS S RDERE D 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?