Reyes et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Filing
65
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: COURT-ORDERED MEDIATION. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 3/1/12. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/2/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
MICHAEL J. STEINER (State Bar No. 112079)
mjs@severson.com
ALEX C. SEARS (State Bar No.232491)
acs@severson.com
SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 398-3344
Facsimile: (415) 956-0439
6
7
Attorneys for Defendant
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12 GUSTAVO REYES and MARIA TERESA
GUERRERO, husband and wife, individually
13 and on behalf of others similarly situated,
14
Case No.: 3:10-cv-01667-JCS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RE: COURT-ORDERED MEDIATION
Plaintiffs,
15
vs.
16 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., a national
bank; and DOES 1-100, inclusive,
17
Defendants.
18
19
Judge:
The Hon. Joseph C. Spero
Complaint Filed: Mar. 11, 2010
Trial Date:
(not yet set)
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2010, this Court ordered plaintiffs Gustavo Reyes and Maria
20
Teresa Guerrero and defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., to mediate this case pursuant to Local
21
Rule 6; and
22
23
WHEREAS, the parties agreed to schedule the mediation before the court-appointed
mediator; and
24
WHEREAS, the parties subsequently agreed to conduct a mediation before a private
25
mediator, namely, Hon. Ronald M. Sabraw (Ret.) of JAMS, in lieu of the court-appointed
26
mediation procedure; and
27
///
28
///
07725/0128/2143071.1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: MEDIATION
1
WHEREAS, the parties previously submitted a stipulation and proposed order to the Court
2
informing the Court of their decision to mediate before Retired Judge Sabraw and requesting a
3
continuance of the schedule for class certification; and
4
5
WHEREAS, the Court entered the proposed order on December 21, 2011 directing the
parties to mediate as they had agreed; and
6
7
WHEREAS, the parties held the agreed-upon mediation before Retired Judge Sabraw on
February 16, 2012; and
8
9
10
WHEREAS, the parties believe that the mediation before Retired Judge Sabraw was
productive and resulted in progress toward settlement, though they have not yet reached a final
resolution; and
11
WHEREAS, the parties believe that their mediation before Retired Judge Sabraw
12
constituted satisfaction of their agreement to mediate this matter, and that court-appointed
13
mediation is unnecessary;
14
WHEREFORE, the parties agree and hereby stipulate as follows:
15
1.
16
That the February 16, 2012 mediation session satisfied their obligation to mediate
this case pursuant to the Court’s August 29, 2010 order; and
17
///
18
///
19
///
20
///
21
///
22
///
23
///
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
07725/0128/2143071.1
-2–
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: MEDIATION
1
2.
2
That mediation before the court-appointed mediator is unnecessary in light of the
parties’ February 16, 2012 mediation.
3
This stipulation is without prejudice to the rights, claims, defenses and arguments of all
4
parties.
5
DATED: February 29, 2012
LAW OFFICES OF PETER B. FREDMAN
LAW OFFICES OF DAVID PIVOTRAK
6
7
By:
/S/Peter B. Fredman
Peter B. Fredman
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
8
9
10
DATED: February 29, 2012
SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
11
12
By:
/S/ Michael J. Steiner
Michael J. Steiner
13
Attorneys for Defendant
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
14
15
16
PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION,
17
IT IS ORDERED that the parties have satisfied their obligation to mediate this
case pursuant to the Court’s August 29, 2010 order, and that the Court hereby VACATES its
19
previous referral to court-appointed mediation.
RT
U
O
March 1, 2012
Date:________________________
21
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
UNIT
ED
NO
H
ER
25
FO
RT
24
Judge
LI
23
R NIA
______________________________
Hon. Joseph C. Spero
U.S. MAGISTRATEC. Spero
JUDGE
Joseph
22
A
20
S
18
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
26
27
28
07725/0128/2143071.1
-3–
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: MEDIATION
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?