Catchings v. Salazar et al

Filing 18

ORDER re 17 Stipulation filed by Rufus Catchings Settlement Conference set for 4/5/2011 10:00 AM.. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge MARIA-ELENA JAMES on 10/14/10. (bjtS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/14/2010)

Download PDF
Catchings v. Salazar et al Doc. 18 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 RICHARD A. HOYER (SBN 151931) HOYER & ASSOCIATES 240 Stockton Street, 9th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 956-1360 Fax: (415) 276-1738 Attorneys for Plaintiff RUFUS CATCHINGS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RUFUS CATCHINGS, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) KEN SALAZAR, in his official capacity as ) ) Secretary of the Interior, ) ) Defendant. ) Case No. 10-00625-TEH (MEJ) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING THE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WHEREAS Plaintiff's lead attorney, Richard Hoyer, will be undergoing hip-replacement surgery on October 18, 2010, and will be bed-ridden in the hospital on October 20, 2010, the date of the mandatory settlement conference. WHEREAS Also, due to Mr. Hoyer's previous surgeries, Plaintiff has been unable to complete depositions of key witnesses in time to prepare for the mandatory settlement conference and will need additional time to complete such discovery. WHEREAS Plaintiff's attorney is unavailable to complete key depositions until midMarch, 2011 due to previously-scheduled trials, arbitration hearings, and mediations. Plaintiff 27 28 S T IP U L A T IO N A N D [P R O P O S E D ] O R D E R 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 will not be prepared to conduct a mandatory settlement conference until early April, 2011. WHEREAS Plaintiff's attorney is unavailable due to previously-scheduled trials during the second and third weeks of April (April 11-22). 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 S T IP U L A T IO N A N D [P R O P O S E D ] O R D E R WHEREAS the discovery cut-off is in May, 2011, and the last day to hold a mandatory settlement conference, pursuant to the Court's scheduling order, is October 12, 2011. THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE that the mandatory settlement conference be continued until a convenient time for the Court during April, 2011, but not during the second and third weeks of April (April 11-22). Dated: HOYER & ASSOCIATES ___________________________ David C. Lipps Attorney for Plaintiff RUFUS CATCHINGS Dated: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ___________________________ Melanie Proctor Attorney for Defendant KEN SALAZAR 2 1 2 3 IT IS ORDERED that the mandatory settlement conference shall be continued until April, 2011, but not during the second and third weeks of April (April 11-22). The new mandatory settlement conference date shall be ________________________________. April 5, 2011 at 10:00 am 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 S T IP U L A T IO N A N D [P R O P O S E D ] O R D E R Dated: October 14, 2010 IT IS SO ORDERED. ___________________________ Chief Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James 3 8' - 'CrlTT- 13-2918 10: 32 F r o m : UE; QTTCrPbIEY 415436716S T o : 141527Et1738 F. 2 ~ ' 2 will not be prcpwed to conduct a manda~ory settlement conference until early April, 201 1. WHEREAS PlaintifT's attorney 1s unavailable duc tct previously-scheduled trials during the second and third wecks of April (April 1 1-22). WHEREAS tbe discnvcq out-ot'fis in May, 201 1, and the lask day to bold a n1andatoi-y settlement confmncc, pursuant to the Court's scheduling order, i s October 12,201 1. THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HER FRY STIPULATE that the mandatory settlement conference be contin~ted until a convenient time for the Court dunng April, 201 1. but not during thc second and third weeks of April (April 1 f -22). HOVER R.. ASS,OCIATES Dated- 0 % 13 12.010 US.DEPARTMENT OF JIJSTICE h,lelanie Proctor Attorney fox Defendant E N SALAZAR STIPULATION AND I ~ S E ORRER D~

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?