Wu v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation et al
Filing
32
ORDER GRANTING 31 Stipulation Continuing Pretrial Deadlines Based on Conditional Settlement. Case Management Statement due by 2/24/2012. Case Management Conference set for 3/2/2012 01:30 PM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 10/11/11. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/11/2011)
Case3:10-cv-04085-JSW Document31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Filed10/07/11 Page1 of 3
GREGORY P. O'HARA (SBN 131963)
gohara@nixonpeabody.com
ANDREW R. NEILSON (SBN 221694)
aneilson@nixonpeabody.com
GINA M. FORNARIO (SBN 246619)
gfornario@nixonpeabody.com
NIXON PEABODY LLP
One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111-3600
Telephone: (415) 984-8200
Fax: (415) 984-8300
Attorneys for Defendant
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
AS RECEIVER OF UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13
14
15
THOMAS S. WU,
Plaintiff,
16
17
18
19
20
21
Case No. CV10-4085 JSW
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
CONTINUING PRETRIAL DEADLINES
BASED ON CONDITIONAL
SETTLEMENT
vs.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION, in its capacity as receiver of
United Commercial Bank, and FEDERAL
DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, in its
corporate capacity,
Defendants.
22
23
24
STIPULATION
This case arises out of the failure of United Commercial Bank (“UCB”). On March 15-16,
25
2011, the above-captioned parties attended mediation with Hon. Daniel Weinstein (Ret.). The
26
mediation included participants and issues from several legal actions, including Thomas Wu’s claims
27
against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in its capacity as receiver of UCB (the “FDIC”)
28
1
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
Case No. Case No. CV10-4085 JSW
13639107.1
Case3:10-cv-04085-JSW Document31
Filed10/07/11 Page2 of 3
1
and the FDIC’s claims against Mr. Wu (together, “the Parties”). The terms of a conditional global
2
settlement were reached. However, given the number of participants and the complexity of the
3
issues, the parties are still negotiating the terms and conditions of a final agreement;
4
WHEREAS the Parties believe that it would promote efficiency and the conservation of the
5
Court’s and the Parties’ resources to continue pretrial deadlines while the Parties negotiate the terms
6
and conditions of a final agreement;
7
8
9
10
11
THEREFORE, the Parties, through their respective counsel of record, hereby agree and
stipulate that:
1.
The FDIC’s responsive pleading deadline shall be continued from October 31, 2011,
to February 1, 2012; and
2.
The Case Management Conference and all attendant matters – including the filing of
12
the joint Case Management Statement and Rule 26(f) Report, and the serving of the parties’ initial
13
disclosures under Rule 26(a) – shall be continued until after February 1, 2012, on a date to be set by
14
the Court.
15
16
Dated: October 7, 2011
NIXON PEABODY LLP
17
18
By
19
Andrew Neilson
Attorneys for Defendant Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, as receiver of
United Commercial Bank
20
21
22
/s/ Andrew Neilson
Dated: October 7, 2011
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
23
24
By
25
/s/ Timothy Crudo
Timothy P. Crudo
Attorneys for Plaintiff Thomas S. Wu
26
27
28
-2STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDE
Case No. Case No. CV10-4085 JSW
13639107.1
Case3:10-cv-04085-JSW Document31
1
Filed10/07/11 Page3 of 3
[PROPOSED] ORDER
2
October 31, 2011
The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for _______________, is hereby
3
March 2
continued to _______________, 2012. The parties shall meet and confer and file a Joint Case
4
Management Statement and exchange initial disclosures pursuant to FRCP 26(a) on or before
5
February 24
_______________, 2012.
6
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
8
9
Dated: October ____, 2011
11
______________________________
Hon. Jeffrey S. White
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
Case No. Case No. CV10-4085 JSW
13639107.1
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?