Graham v. AT&T Pension Benefit Plan - Non-Bargained Program et al
STIPULATION AND ORDER Selecting ADR Process. Case referred to Early Neutral Evaluation. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 11/15/2011. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2011)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CASE NO. 11-CV-4085 TEH
AT&T Pension Benefit Plan - NonBargained
Program; AT&T, Inc.; and Does 1-10,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the
following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5:
The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process:
Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4)
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
(Note: Parties who believe that an early settlement conference with a Magistrate Judge is
appreciably more likely to meet their needs than any other form of ADR, must participate in an
ADR phone conference and may not file this form. They must instead file a Notice of Need for
ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5)
Private ADR (please identify process and provider) ______________________
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
the presumptive deadline (The deadline is 90 days from the date of the order
referring the case to an ADR process unless otherwise ordered. )
other requested deadline _____________________________________________
/s/ Karen Phillips
Attorney for Plaintiff
/s/ M'Alyssa C. Mecenas
Attorney for Defendant
When filing this document in ECF, please be sure to use the appropriate ADR Docket
Event, e.g., "Stipulation and Proposed Order Selecting Early Neutral Evaluation."
Pursuant to the Stipulation above, the captioned matter is hereby referred to:
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE)
Deadline for ADR session
90 days from the date of this order.
Hon. Thelton E. Henderson
UNITED STATES DISTRICTon
on E. H
IT IS SO ORDERED.
D IS T IC T
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?