McMillin v. Foster City et al

Filing 21

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE [re 20 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER]. Case Management Statement due by 5/3/2012. Case Management Conference set for 5/10/2012 03:00 PM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 4/9/2012. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/9/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 Russell A. Robinson (163937) Law Office of Russell A. Robinson 345 Grove Street, Level One San Francisco CA 94102 Telephone: (415) 255-0462 Facsimile: (415) 431-4526 4 5 Counsel for Plaintiff TOM McMILLIN 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TOM McMILLIN, 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 FOSTER CITY, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ) No. C-11-3201-WHA ) ) STIPULATED REQUEST TO ) CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT ) CONFERENCE; ORDER ) April 19, 2012 ) Date: 3:00 p.m. ) Time: ) ) Honorable William H. Alsup 16 TO THE HONORABLE COURT HEREIN: 17 THE PARTIES HERETO HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 18 There presently is set a case management herein for April 19, 2012, at 19 3:00 p.m. Plaintiff’s counsel likely will be in trial in Alameda County in the matter 20 21 Cacianti v. Ratto, and thus likely will be unavailable for the April 19, 2012, 22 CMC before this Court. As a result of the meet and confer process, the parties agreed on a 23 24 date by which Plaintiff will file a first amended complaint. The parties have 25 also agreed information Plaintiff believes relevant may be discovered through 26 a subpoena served on the State of California, Department of Consumer 27 Affairs, and production pursuant to that subpoena has not been completed. 28 /// ____________________________________________________________________________________ McMillin v. Foster City, et al. P041STIP STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC; ORDER The parties’ counsel have met and conferred and are in the process of 1 2 submitting timely their joint case management statement. After conferring on a new date, all counsel agree they are available on 3 4 Thursday, May 10, 2012, at 3:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the Court 5 may set this matter. Therefore, based on the above, the parties hereby request that the 6 7 Court re-schedule the initial Case Management Conference to May 10, 2012. 8 9 Date: April 9, 2012 Russell A. Robinson /s/ By: Russell A. Robinson Law Office of Russell A. Robinson Counsel for Plaintiff TOM McMILLIN Date: April 9, 2012 Joseph C. Howard, Jr. /s/ By: Joseph C. Howard, Jr. Howard Rome Martin & Ridley, LLP Counsel for Defendants FOSTER CITY, FOSTER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, DOUGLAS NIX, and PIERRE MORRISON Date: April 9, 2012 Daniel J. Valim /s/ By: Daniel J. Valim Office of County Counsel County of San Mateo Counsel for Defendants COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, SAN MATEO DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, VISHAL DINESH JANGLA, and ALPANA DAMODAR SAMANT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 /// ____________________________________________________________________________________ McMillin v. Foster City, et al. P041STIP STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC; -2ORDER ORDER 1 Based on the above stipulated request, and good cause appearing, it is 2 hereby ordered as follows: The case management conference set for April 19, 2012, at 3:00 p.m., 4 8 11 S D AS MO ls illiam A Judge W ER H 14 RT 13 Honorable WILLIAM H. ALSUP Judge, United StatesDERED Court R District IS SO O FIED Northern District of California IT I NO 12 9 April ___, 2012 UNIT ED 10 Date: RT U O 9 ISTRIC ES D TC AT T R NIA 7 up FO 6 3:00 is hereby continued to Thursday, May 10 ___, 2012, at ______p.m. The A joint statement is due at least seven days prior. parties need not file a new joint case management conference statement. THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER CONTINUANCES. IT IS SO ORDERED. LI 5 A 3 N F D IS T IC T O R C 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ____________________________________________________________________________________ McMillin v. Foster City, et al. P041STIP STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC; -3ORDER

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?