Crosthwaite et al v. Paul T. Beck Contractors, Inc

Filing 49

STIPULATION AND ORDER Case Management Conference set for 11/18/11 is continued to 3/9/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 1, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Samuel Conti.. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 11/14/11. (tdm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2011)

Download PDF
1 Michele R. Stafford, Esq. (SBN 172509) Blake E. Williams, Esq. (SBN 233158) 2 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110 3 San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 882-7900 4 (415) 882-9287 – Facsimile mstafford@sjlawcorp.com 5 bwilliams@sjlawcorp.com 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 7 Andrew B. Kreeft, Esq. (SBN 126673) Sergio H. Parra, Esq. (SBN 247682) 8 Bohnen, Rosenthal & Kreeft 787 Munras Avenue, Suite 200 9 Monterey, CA 93940 (831) 649-5551 10 (831) 649-0272 – Facsimile akreeft@mbaylaw.com 11 sparra@mbaylaw.com 12 Attorneys for Defendants 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 GIL CROSTHWAITE and RUSS BURNS, in their respective capacities as Trustees of the 16 OPERATING ENGINEERS’ HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND, et al., 17 Plaintiffs, 18 v. 19 PAUL T. BECK CONTRACTORS, INC., a 20 California corporation; JAMES RAY BECK, individually, and dba JRB GRADING & PAVING 21 aka JRB GRADING & PAVING, LLC., a Limited Liability Company, 22 Defendants. 23 Case No.: C10-0151 SC JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE Date: Time: Courtroom: Judge: November 18, 2011 10:00 a.m. 1, 17th Floor 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Honorable Samuel Conti 24 25 Plaintiffs and Defendants jointly request that the Case Management Conference scheduled 26 for November 18, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. be continued for approximately 45 days, as follows: 27 1. On May 27, 2011, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint to include Defendants 28 James Ray Beck, individually and doing business as JRB Grading & Paving, also known as JRB -1JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE Case No.: C10-0151 SC P:\CLIENTS\OE3CL\Paul T. Beck Contractors\Pleadings\C10-0151 SC - Joint Req to Continue CMC 111011.doc 1 Grading & Paving, LLC. 2 2. On June 24, 2011, Defendants filed their Answer to the Amended Complaint. 3 3. On July 15, 2011, Plaintiffs filed an Administrative Motion to Consider Whether 4 Case No. C11-0454 PJH (Operating Engineers Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. James Ray Beck, 5 individually, and dba JRB Grading & Paving aka JRB Grading & Paving, LLC) should be Related 6 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12. 7 4. On July 22, 2011, the Court issued a Related Case Order, relating the two matters 8 before the Honorable Samuel Conti. 9 5. The Parties are currently engaged in active settlement discussions and are working 10 toward an informal resolution of this Matter. It is the consensus of the Parties that if a settlement 11 can be reached outside of Court, it will be reached in the next several weeks. All Defendants are 12 aware that if a resolution cannot be reached informally, Plaintiffs will file a Motion for Summary 13 Judgment against all Defendants named in the Amended Complaint. 14 6. Given the state of the Parties’ settlement discussions, there is nothing to discuss at a 15 Case Management Conference at the present time. 16 7. We therefore jointly request that the Case Management Conference be continued 17 for approximately 45 days to allow the Parties time to conclude their settlement discussions. All 18 related deadlines (such as Rule 26 disclosures) shall also be continued along with the Case 19 Management Conference. 20 Dated: November 10, 2011 21 By: _____________/s/_________________ Blake E. Williams Attorneys for Plaintiffs 22 23 24 Dated: November 10, 2011 25 26 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAWCORPORATION BOHNEN, ROSENTHAL & KREEFT By: _____________/s/_________________ Sergio H. Parra Attorneys for Defendants 27 28 -2JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE Case No.: C10-0151 SC P:\CLIENTS\OE3CL\Paul T. Beck Contractors\Pleadings\C10-0151 SC - Joint Req to Continue CMC 111011.doc 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 The currently set Case Management Conference March 9, 2012 10:00 a.m. 3 __________________________ at __________________. is hereby continued to All related deadlines are extended 4 accordingly. UNIT ED onti Judge S H LI RT ER 9 FO amuel C NO 8 R NIA ________________________________ ERED O ORD IT IS S DISTRICT JUDGE UNITED STATES A 7 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O 11/14/11 6 Date: _________________________ S 5 N F D IS T IC T O R C 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE Case No.: C10-0151 SC P:\CLIENTS\OE3CL\Paul T. Beck Contractors\Pleadings\C10-0151 SC - Joint Req to Continue CMC 111011.doc 1 PROOF OF SERVICE: 2 I, the undersigned, declare: 3 I am employed in the County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age of 4 eighteen and not a party to this action. My business address is 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110, 5 San Francisco, California 94104. 6 On November 10, 2011, I served the following document(s) on the parties to this action in 7 the manner described below: 8 9 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE XX 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ELECTRONICALLY by causing said document to be electronically filed using the Court’s Electronic Court Filing (“ECF”) System and service was completed by electronic means by transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing on the registered participants of the ECF System. To: Andrew B. Kreeft, Esq. Sergio H. Parra, Esq. Bohnen, Rosenthal & Kreeft 787 Munras Avenue, Suite 200 Monterey, California 93940 VIA ECF Attorneys for Defendants I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on this 10th day of November, 2011, at San Francisco, California. 19 /s/ Qui X. Lu 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 P:\CLIENTS\OE3CL\Paul T. Beck Contractors\Pleadings\C10-0151 SC - Joint Req to Continue CMC 111011.doc -1PROOF OF SERVICE Case No.: C10-0151 SC

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?