Wolph et al v. ACER America Corporation

Filing 53

ORDER GRANTING 51 Stipulation selecting Mediation. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 9/2/09. (jjo, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/2/2009)

Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document51

Filed08/31/09 Page1 of 3

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

CHAD A. STEGEMAN (SBN 225745) ([e-mail]) AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 580 California Street, Suite 1500 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] JAMES J. SCHESKE (admitted pro hac vice) ([e-mail]) AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 5300 West 6th Street, Suite 2100 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant Acer America Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LORA and CLAY WOLPH, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. ACER AMERICA CORPORATION, a California corporation, Defendant. Case No. CV 09 1314 JSW STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5: The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process: Court Processes: Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4) Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5) Mediation (ADR L.R. 6) (Note: Parties who believe that an early settlement conference with a Magistrate Judge is appreciably more likely to meet their needs than any other form of ADR, must participate in an ADR phone conference and may not file this form. They must instead file a Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5) 1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

Case No. CV 09 1314 JSW

Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document51

Filed08/31/09 Page2 of 3

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

Private Process: Private ADR (please identify process and provider) ____________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ The parties agree to hold the ADR session by: the presumptive deadline (The deadline is 90 days from the date of the order referring the case to an ADR process unless otherwise ordered. ) other requested deadline within six months of the defendant's answer to the Complaint DATED: August 31, 2009 PEARSON, SIMON, WARSHAW & PENNY, LLP DANIEL L. WARSHAW BOBBY POUYA HAUSFELD, LLP MICHAEL P. LEHMANN

By:

/s/ DANIEL L. WARSHAW Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class DATED: August 31, 2009 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP

By:

/s/ CHAD A. STEGEMAN Attorneys for Defendant ACER AMERICA CORPORATION Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding signatures, I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Daniel L. Warshaw. DATED: August 31, 2009 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP

By:

/s/ CHAD A. STEGEMAN Attorneys for Defendant ACER AMERICA CORPORATION

2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

Case No. CV 09 1314 JSW

Case3:09-cv-01314-JSW Document51

Filed08/31/09 Page3 of 3

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

[PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to the Stipulation above, the captioned matter is hereby referred to: Non-binding Arbitration Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) Mediation Private ADR Deadline for ADR session 90 days from the date of this order. Other: mediation shall commence within six months following Defendant's answer to the operative complaint._______________________ IT IS SO ORDERED.

2 DATED: September ___, 2009

Jeffrey S. White United States District Court Judge

3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

Case No. CV 09 1314 JSW