Contest Promotions, LLC v. City of San Francisco et al

Filing 89

ORDER Jury Selection set for 12/12/2011 08:30 AM before Hon. Susan Illston. Jury Trial set for 12/12/2011 08:30 AM before Hon. Susan Illston. Motion Hearing set for 10/14/2011 09:00 AM before Hon. Susan Illston. Pretrial Conference set for 11/22/2011 03:30 PM before Hon. Susan Illston. (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/11/2011)

6

JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP
BENJAMIN M. REZNIK (Bar No. 72364)
[e-mail]
MATTHEW D. HINKS (Bar No. 200750)
[e-mail]
AMY LERNER HILL (Bar No. 216288)
[e-mail]
1900 Avenue of the Stars, Seventh Floor
Los Angeles, California 90067-4308
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff CONTEST PROMOTIONS, LLC

1
2
3
4
5

8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13

CONTEST PROMOTIONS, LLC, a
California limited liability company,
Plaintiff,

14

v.

15
16
17
18
19

CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO, a
municipal corporation; COUNTY OF
SAN FRANCISCO, a subdivision of the
State of California; CITY AND
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, a
chartered California city and county; and
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,

CASE NO. CV 09-4434 SI
THIRD STIPULATION FOR STAY
OF LITIGATION PENDING
SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS AND
FOR CONTINUANCE OF PRETRIAL
AND TRIAL DATES; [PROPOSED]
ORDER

Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7777908v1

-1-

Third Stipulation to Continue Dates

STIPULATION

1
2

1.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 16 and the Local Rules of this

3

Court, plaintiff Contest Promotions, LLC ("Contest Promotions") and defendant City

4

and County of San Francisco (the "City") (collectively, the "parties"), through their

5

respective counsel of record, respectfully submit the following stipulation

6

effectuating the parties' agreement to a further 60-day stay of litigation and requesting

7

an extension of the pre-trial and trial dates pending the parties' settlement discussions.

8

2.

The purpose of this stipulation is to effectuate an agreement

9

reached between the parties for an additional 60-day temporary stay of the litigation

10

to allow the parties to continue their ongoing settlement discussions. The parties

11

previously agreed a stay of the litigation to explore settlement opportunities. On

12

February 28, 2011, to effectuate that agreement, the parties filed a stipulation

13

continuing the pre-trial and trial dates. (Dkt # 81). The Court approved the

14

stipulation on March 1, 2011 and continued the pre-trial and trial dates. (Dkt # 82).

15

On March 18, 2011, the parties entered a second stipulation to continue the pre-trial

16

and trial dates approximately 30 additional days. (Dkt # 84). The Court approved the

17

stipulation on March 21, 2011 and continued the pre-trial and trial dates as set forth

18

below. (Dkt # 85).

19

3.

Since the parties' stay agreement, the parties have made

20

significant efforts to settle this litigation, including attending in-person meetings in

21

San Francisco (Contest Promotions' principals and its counsel are located in Los

22

Angeles), and exchanging pertinent information. As a result of such efforts, the

23

parties have made progress in their settlement discussions. The parties remain

24

committed to making efforts to settle the case.

25

4.

The parties intend to continue their settlement efforts, which

26

will likely include at least one more in-person meeting and a further exchange of

27

information. To facilitate those communications, the parties have agreed to an

28

additional 60-day stay of the litigation, until June 3, 2011 (previously, the parties had
7777908v1

-2-

Third Stipulation to Continue Dates

1

agree to stay the proceedings until April 4, 2011). An additional 60-day stay is

2

necessary because of the complexity of the settlement process. A potential settlement

3

would likely affect all aspects of Contest Promotions' business model. In addition,

4

the settlement process necessitates the involvement of multiple decision-makers on

5

the part of the City. The parties also need time to document any settlement

6

agreement.

7

5.

The parties prefer to spend their efforts during the next 60 days

8

on resolving this case, if possible, instead of litigating it. The parties believe that

9

there is a reasonable chance the such efforts will result in settlement.

10

6.

To effectuate the parties' agreement to stay all litigation

11

activities for 60 days, the parties respectfully request that all case management dates

12

be continued by approximately 60 days, as follows:
CURRENT DATES:

13
14

Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off: May 9, 2011

15

Designation of Experts: May 23, 2011

16

Designation of Rebuttal Experts: June 6, 2011

17

Expert Discovery Cut-Off: June 13, 2011

18

Dispositive Motions, Filed: July 11, 2011

19

Dispositive Motions, Oppositions: July 25, 2011

20

Dispositive Motions, Replies: August 1, 2011

21

Dispositive Motion Hearing Deadline: August 15, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.

22

Pretrial Conference: September 20, 2011 at 3:30 p.m.

23

Jury Trial: October 11, 2011 at 8:30 a.m

24

PROPOSED NEW DATES:

25

Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off: July 8, 2011

26

Designation of Experts: July 22, 2011

27

Designation of Rebuttal Experts: August 5, 2011

28

Expert Discovery Cut-Off: August 12, 2011
7777908v1

-3-

Third Stipulation to Continue Dates

1

Dispositive Motions, Filed: September 12, 2011

2

Dispositive Motions, Oppositions: September 26, 2011

3

Dispositive Motions, Replies: October 3, 2011

4

Dispositive Motion Hearing Deadline: October 17, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.

5

Pretrial Conference: November 21, 2011 at 3:30 p.m.

6

Jury Trial: December 12, 2011 at 8:30 a.m.

7

7.

14

22

There is good cause to continue the pretrial and trial dates

8

because it will allow the parties to focus their efforts on settlement and, at the same

9

time, avoid potentially unnecessary litigation costs.

10

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

11
12

DATED: May 6, 2011

13
14

JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL
LLP
BENJAMIN M. REZNIK
MATTHEW D. HINKS
AMY LERNER HILL

15

By:

/s/ Matthew D. Hinks
MATTHEW D. HINKS
Attorneys for Plaintiff CONTEST
PROMOTIONS, LLC

16
17
18
19

DATED: May 6, 2011

20

DENNIS J. HERRERA
KRISTEN A. JENS
THOMAS S. LAKRITZ
VICTORIA WONG

21

By:
/s/ Thomas S. Lakritz
THOMAS S. LAKRITZ
Attorneys for Defendant CITY AND COUNTY
OF SAN FRANCISCO

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7777908v1

-4-

Third Stipulation to Continue Dates

[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

1
2

The parties' Third Stipulation for Stay of Litigation Pending Settlement

3

Discussions and for Continuance of Pretrial and Trial Dates is hereby adopted by the

4

Court as the Case Management Order for the case and the parties are ordered to

5

comply with this Order.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED:

8
9

Dated:______________________
5/11/11

10

By:

11
12

HONORABLE SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Court Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7777908v1

-5-

Third Stipulation to Continue Dates

ATTESTATION CLAUSE

1
2

I, Matthew Hinks, hereby attest in accordance with General Order No. 45.X

3

that Thomas S. Lakrtiz, Counsel for Defendant City and County of San Francisco, has

4

provided his concurrence with the electronic filing of the foregoing document entitled

5

THIRD STIPULATION FOR STAY OF LITIGATION PENDING SETTLEMENT

6

DISCUSSIONS AND FOR CONTINUANCE OF PRETRIAL AND TRIAL DATES;

7

[PROPOSED] ORDER.

8
9

DATED: May 6, 2011

10
11

By:

/s/ Matthew D. Hinks
MATTHEW D. HINKS
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CONTEST PROMOTIONS, LLC.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7777908v1

-6-

Third Stipulation to Continue Dates