Jenkins et al v. Mandelbaum et al

Filing 49

STIPULATION AND ORDER RESETTING DMC re 48 Stipulation filed by 3EB Touring Inc, Stephan Jenkins Productions Inc, Third Eye Blind Inc, Stephan Jenkins Status Report due by 3/2/2012. Status Conference set for 3/9/2012 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/31/11. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 RICHARD J. IDELL, ESQ. (SBN 069033) ORY SANDEL, ESQ. (SBN 233204) IDELL & SEITEL LLP 465 California Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 986-2400 Facsimile: (415) 392-9259 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants STEPHAN JENKINS, THIRD EYE BLIND, INC., 3EB TOURING, INC. and STEPHAN JENKINS PRODUCTIONS, INC. JAMES A. MURPHY, ESQ. (SBN 062223) MURPHY, PEARSON, BRADLEY & FEENEY 88 Kearny Street, 10th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108-5530 Telephone: (415) 788-1900 Facsimile: (415) 393-8087 13 14 Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Claimant HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP 15 16 17 KENNETH M. LABBATE, ESQ. (admitted pro hac vice) SANJIT SHAH, ESQ. (admitted pro hac vice) DAVID A. NELSON, ESQ. (admitted pro hac vice) MOUND, COTTON, WOLLAN & GREENGRASS 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 JOSEPH M. RIMAC, ESQ. (SBN 072381) WILLIAM REILLY, ESQ. (SBN 177550) RIMAC & MARTIN, P.C. 1051 Divisadero Street San Francisco, California 94115 Telephone: (415) 561-8440 Facsimile: (415) 561-8430 Attorneys for Defendants Thomas I. Mandelbaum and Selverne, Mandelbaum & Mintz, LLP 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 26 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 27 28 STEPHAN JENKINS, an individual; THIRD EYE BLIND, INC., a California corporation; 3EB TOURING, INC., a California Case No.: CV-11-0211 EMC STIPULATION RE: FURTHER 1 STIPULATION RE: FURTHER EXTENSION OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 1 2 corporation; and STEPHAN JENKINS PRODUCTIONS, INC., a California corporation, 3 4 5 6 7 8 Plaintiffs, vs. EXTENSION OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER (E-filing) Hon. Edward M. Chen, Presiding THOMAS IRVING MANDELBAUM, an individual; SELVERNE, MANDELBAUM & MINTZ, LLP, a New York limited liability partnership; HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP, a New York limited liability partnership; and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, Defendants. 9 10 11 HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP, a New York limited liability partnership, 12 Counter-Claimant, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 vs. STEPHAN JENKINS, an individual; THIRD EYE BLIND, INC., a California corporation; 3EB TOURING, INC., a California corporation; and STEPHAN JENKINS PRODUCTIONS, INC., a California corporation, Counter-Defendants. This Stipulation is entered into by and between all of the parties to the above action through their undersigned attorneys: WHEREAS, the Court, at the Case Management Conference held on April 20, 2011, 22 ordered the case to mediation with a private mediator and ordered that the case be mediated 23 before July 31, 2011; and 24 WHEREAS, the parties sought and obtained the agreement of the parties in a related 25 case, Fredianelli v. Jenkins, Action No. 11-CV-01562-R-JC (originally filed in the Central 26 District; transferred to the Northern District) (“Fredianelli Case”), to mediate the case together 27 with the above-referenced matter; and 28 2 STIPULATION RE: FURTHER EXTENSION OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 1 2 WHEREAS, the Fredianelli Case has also now been assigned to the Hon. Judge Edward Chen; and 3 4 WHEREAS, the parties agreed to mediate both cases before the Hon. Judge Scott Snowden (Ret.) of JAMS; and 5 6 WHEREAS, the two cases were mediated over a two-day period, July 12 and 13, 2011; and 7 WHEREAS, since the parties were still working on settlement, after the July mediation, 8 and jointly believed that additional time was needed to complete the mediation process and 9 negotiate a global resolution of this action and the Fredianelli Case, the parties jointly requested 10 that the Court continue the August 12, 2011 Case Management Conference for 90 days; and 11 WHEREAS, the Court did continue the Case Management Conference set for August 12, 12 2011, to November 7, 2011, and continued the effectiveness of its Case Management and Pretrial 13 Order of April 22, 2011, including, but not limited to the provision that no motion(s) for 14 summary judgment shall be filed prior to completion of mediation, and continue the mediation 15 completion date for 90 days or until October 31, 2011, by the Court’s Order of August 3, 2011; 16 and 17 18 19 WHEREAS, the Case Management Conference in the Fredianelli Case is also set for November 7, 2011; and WHEREAS, although the parties’ efforts to achieve a global resolution by October 31, 20 2011 were hindered by the decisions of certain parties in the Fredianelli Case, i.e., Plaintiff 21 Anthony Fredianelli and Defendants David Rawson and Zeisler, Zeisler, Rawson & Johnson, 22 LLP, to discharge the attorneys who had represented them during the July 2011 mediation 23 sessions and retain new counsel, the parties are still working on settlement and have scheduled 24 an additional mediation session in the Fredianelli Case for November 16, 2011; and 25 WHEREAS, if the parties are successful in settling this Fredianelli Case on November 26 16, 2011, an additional mediation session will be set in the Jenkins v. Mandelbaum case in 27 December, 2011; and 28 3 STIPULATION RE: FURTHER EXTENSION OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 1 WHEREAS, if for any reason one or both of the cases do not settle, the parties agree that 2 a new trial date and discovery schedule will need to be set at the upcoming and continued Case 3 Management Conferences, since the parties have not engaged in any discovery other than the 4 limited exchange of documents, and the fact discovery cut-off date in this action is March 26, 5 2012. 6 NOW THEREFORE, the parties jointly agree to continue the Case Management 7 Conference now set for November 7, 2011, for at least 90 days to a date after January 30, 2012, 8 and to continue the effectiveness of the Case Management Pretrial Order of April 22, 2011, 9 including but not limited to the provision that no motion(s) for summary judgment shall be filed 10 prior to completion of mediation, and continue the mediation completion date for 90 days or until 11 February 29, 2012. 12 13 14 MURPHY, PEARSON, BRADLEY & FEENEY Dated: October 25, 2011 By: 15 16 /s/ James Murphy Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Claimant HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP 17 MOUND COTTON WOLLAN & GREENGRASS 18 19 Dated: October 25, 2011 By: 20 21 22 /s/ Kenneth M. Labbate Sanjit Shah Attorneys for Defendants Thomas I. Mandelbaum; and Selverne, Mandelbaum & Mintz, LLP 23 IDELL & SEITEL LLP 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: October 25, 2011 By: /s/ Richard Idell Ory Sandel Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants STEPHAN JENKINS, THIRD EYE BLIND, INC., 3EB TOURING, INC. and STEPHAN JENKINS PRODUCTIONS, INC. 4 STIPULATION RE: FURTHER EXTENSION OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 1 2 ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE I, Richard J. Idell, as the ECF user and filer of this document, attest that, pursuant to 3 General Order No. 45(X)(B), concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from 4 Sanjit Shah and James Murphy, the above signatories. 5 6 IDELL & SEITEL LLP Dated: October 25, 2011 By: /s/ Richard Idell Ory Sandel Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants STEPHAN JENKINS, THIRD EYE BLIND, INC., 3EB TOURING, INC. and STEPHAN JENKINS PRODUCTIONS, INC. 7 8 9 10 11 RT U O 18 21 DIFI hen rd M. C ER H 20 dwa Judge E RT 19 AS MO LI 17 A 16 NO 15 UNIT ED S 14 PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. Status Conference is reset from DISTRIC 11/7/11 to 3/9/12 at ES TC AT 10/31/11 10:30 a.m. T Dated: Hon. Edward M. Chen Judge of the ERED States District Court United RD Northern S SO O District of California IT I ED R NIA 13 [PROPOSED] ORDER FO 12 N F D IS T IC T O R C 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 STIPULATION RE: FURTHER EXTENSION OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

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?