Zeigler v. Redwoods Community College District et al

Filing 25

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 24 Stipulation, filed by Abe Ali, Redwoods Community College District, Joe Hash, Amy Daily, Constance Carlson, Yokotobi Fusako, Bill Studt. Signed by Judge James Ware on 12/20/11. (sis, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2011)

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

6

10
11
12
13

LI

ER

A

H

9

Eugene B. Elliot, State Bar No. 111475
Michael C. Wenzel, State Bar No. 215388
BERTRAND, FOX & ELLIOT
The Waterfront Building
2749 Hyde Street
San Francisco, California 94109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

RT

8

re

mes Wa
Judge Ja

NO

7

R NIA

5

Attorneys for Plaintiff
TODD ZEIGLER

FO

4

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

3

S

2

Peter Eric Martin, State Bar No. 121672
PETER E. MARTIN, A LAW CORPORATION
917 Third Street
Eureka, CA 95501
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

UNIT
ED

1

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

Attorneys for Defendants
REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT,
ABE ALI, BILL STUDT, YOKOTOBI FUSAKO,
CONSTANCE CARLSON, AMY DAILY and JOE HASH

14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17

TODD ZEIGLER

18

Plaintiff,

19

v.

20

Case No. CV 11-04849 JW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE
PLEADING BY INDIVIDUALLY NAMED
DEFENDANTS ABE ALI AND BILL STUDT

REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT, ABE ALI, BILL STUDT,
YOKOTOBI FUSAKO,CONSTANCE
CARLSON, AMY DAILY, JOE HASH,
Does 1 through 10,

21
22
23

Defendants.

24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING
BY INDIVIDUALLY NAMED DEFENDANTS ABE ALI AND BILL STUDT

1
2
3

The parties in the above-captioned case, by and through their counsel of record, hereby represent
to the Court as follows:
1.

On August 31, 2011, Plaintiff filed his initial Complaint in this action against Defendants

4

REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, ABE ALI, BILL STUDT, YOKOTOBI

5

FUSAKO, CONSTANCE CARLSON, AMY DAILY, JOE HASH in Humboldt County Superior Court.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

2.

On September 1, 2011, Plaintiff served the Complaint on the REDWOODS

COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT.
3.

On or about September 30, 2011 defendant REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE

DISTRICT removed the matter to the United States District Court, Northern District.
4.

On October 7, 2011, defendant REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint as to the causes of action brought against it.
5.

The Motion to Dismiss has been fully briefed by the parties and is set for hearing on

December 19, 2011.
6.

Subsequent to the filing of that motion, counsel for the REDWOODS COMMUNITY

15

COLLEGE DISTRICT agreed to accept service of the complaint on behalf of CONSTANCE CARLSON

16

and JOE HASH, the only two individually named defendants still employed by the DISTRICT.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

7.

Pursuant to that acceptance of service, the responsive pleading of CONSTANCE

CARLSON and JOE HASH was due December 7, 2011.
8.

On or about November 15, 2011, defendant AMY DAILY was served with the Complaint.

DAILY's responsive pleading was due December 6, 2011.
9.

On or about November 18, 2011 defendant FUSAKO YOKOTOBI was served with the

Complaint. YOKOTOBI's responsive pleading was due December 9, 2011.
10.

On December 2, 2011, the parties submitted a stipulation and Order to the Court seeking

24

to extend the time for the above named individual defendants to respond to the complaint until twenty-

25

one days after this Court issues its ruling on the DISTRICT's pending Motion to Dismiss, or as otherwise

26

set forth by the Court in its Order upon the DISTRICT’s Motion to Dismiss.

27
28

11.

On December 5, 2011, the Court issued an Order approving the parties stipulation, and

Ordering individual defendants CARLSON, HASH, DAILY and YOKOTOBI to respond to the
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING
BY INDIVIDUALLY NAMED DEFENDANTS ABE ALI AND BILL STUDT

1

complaint twenty-one days after the Court issues its ruling on the DISTRICT's pending Motion to

2

Dismiss, or as otherwise set forth by the Court in its Order upon the DISTRICT’s Motion to Dismiss.

3
4
5
6
7

12.

Subsequent to receipt of this Court's Order, on or about December 8, 2011, defendant

ABE ALI was served with the Complaint. ALI's responsive pleading is due December 29, 2011.
13.

On or about December 9, 2011 defendant BILL STUDT was served with the Complaint.

STUDT's responsive pleading is due December 30, 2011.
14.

Individual defendants ALI and STUDT will be represented by counsel for the DISTRICT.

8

Four of the five causes of action contained in the complaint are common to both the DISTRICT and

9

individual defendants. These individual defendants intend to move to dismiss the complaint on similar

10

grounds as those set forth by the DISTRICT in its pending Motion to Dismiss set for hearing on

11

December 19, 2011, and potentially on additional grounds with respect to the cause of action brought

12

solely against them.

13

15.

In the interests of judicial economy, and to avoid piecemeal litigation and multiple

14

repetitive Motions to Dismiss, the parties have, subject to this Court's approval, and as previously

15

stipulated with respect to individual defendants HASH, CARLSON, DAILY and YOKOTOBI, stipulated

16

to extend the responsive pleading deadline on behalf of defendants ALI and STUDT until twenty-one

17

days after this Court issues its ruling on the DISTRICT's pending Motion to Dismiss.

18

16.

This Court issued its ruling granting the DISTRICT's Motion to Dismiss on December 15,

19

2011. The responsive pleading of individual defendants HASH, CARLSON, DAILY and YOKOTOBI is

20

now January 5, 2011. The parties stipulate and agree that the responsive pleading of defendants ALI and

21

STUDT shall be due January 5, 2011.

22
Dated: December 19, 2011

PETER E. MARTIN, A LAW CORPORATION

23
24
25

By: /s/ Peter E. Martin
Peter E. Martin
Attorneys for Plaintiff

26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING
BY INDIVIDUALLY NAMED DEFENDANTS ABE ALI AND BILL STUDT

1

Dated: December 15, 2011

2

BERTRAND, FOX & ELLIOT
By: /s/ Michael C. Wenzel
Michael C. Wenzel
Attorneys for Defendants

3
4
5

ORDER

6
7
8

Upon the foregoing Stipulation, and for good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants
ABE ALI and BILL STUDT shall respond to Plaintiff's Complaint on or before January 5, 2011.

9
10

20
DATED: December ___, 2011

____________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING
BY INDIVIDUALLY NAMED DEFENDANTS ABE ALI AND BILL STUDT