High v. The Choice Manufacturing Company, Inc. et al

Filing 36

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 35 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Continuing Case Management Conference and the Parties F.R.C.P. 26 Obligations filed by Mepco Finance Corporation Case Management Statement due by 4/20/2012. Case Management Conference set for 4/27/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/22/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/22/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

DOWNEY BRAND LLP
JAMIE P. DREHER (Bar No. 209380)
SPENCER W. CHRISTENSEN (Bar No. 267154)
621 Capitol Mall, 18th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814-4731
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
MEPCO FINANCE CORPORATION

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JACKIE L. HIGH, individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

12
Plaintiff,
13
v.

Case No. CV 11 5478
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER CONTINUING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
THE PARTIES F.R.C.P. 26 OBLIGATIONS

14
15
16

THE CHOICE MANUFACTURING
COMPANY, INC., MEPCO FINANCE
CORPORATION, and DOES 3 through 20,
inclusive,

17

Defendant.

18
19

WHEREAS, on November 10, 2011, plaintiff Jackie L. High (“Plaintiff”) filed a

20

complaint against The Choice Manufacturing Company, Inc. (“Choice”) and MEPCO Finance

21

Corporation (“MEPCO”) captioned High v. The Choice Manufacturing Company, Inc., et al.,

22

Case No. CV-11-05478-LB;
WHEREAS on December 15, 2011, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint pursuant to

23
24

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a);
WHEREAS the Parties previously stipulated to continue the deadline for Defendants to

25
26

answer the Amended Complaint to February 17, 2012;

27

WHEREAS on February 17, 2012, MEPCO filed a motion to dismiss the Amended

28

Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a), 9(b) and 12(b)(6) (“Motion to
1214753.1

1

1

Dismiss”). The Motion to Dismiss is set for hearing on April 6, 2012 in front of the Honorable

2

Edward M. Chen.

3

WHEREAS Plaintiff and MEPCO have agreed that the currently scheduled case

4

management conference, which is set for March 2, 2012, should be continued to a date after the

5

hearing on the Motion to Dismiss pending the Court’s ruling thereon. The purpose of the

6

agreement to continue the case management conference is to make the process more efficient as

7

the parties will have more information to report to the Court at that time. Accordingly, Plaintiff

8

and MEPCO hereby stipulate to continue the case management conference to April 27, 2012 at

9

9:00 a.m.

10

WHEREAS Plaintiff and MEPCO have further agreed to continue the deadlines for their

11

mutual obligations under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, including the obligations to meet

12

and confer, to file a joint status conference and make their initial disclosures to coincide with the

13

date of the new case management conference. Accordingly, Plaintiff and MEPCO hereby

14

stipulate to continue the:

15

(1) The deadline to meet and confer pursuant to F.R.C.P. 26(f) to April 6, 2012;

16

(2) The deadline to file a joint case management statement pursuant to Civil Standing

17

Order 6 to April 20, 2012;

18

(3) The deadline to make initial disclosures pursuant to F.R.C.P. 26(a)(1)(C) to April 20,

19

2013.

20

///

21

///

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
1214753.1

2

1

IT IS ACCORDINGLY STIPULATED, by and between undersigned counsel for the

2

parties, that the Case Management Conference be continued to April 27, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.; that

3

the deadline to meet and confer pursuant to F.R.C.P. 26(f) be continued to April 6, 2012; that the

4

deadline to file a joint case management statement be continued to April 20, 2012; and that the

5

deadline to make initial disclosures pursuant to F.R.C.P. 26(a)(1)(C) also be continued to April

6

20, 2013.

7
8

DATED: February 21, 2012

DOWNEY BRAND LLP

9
By:

10

/s/ Spencer W. Christensen
SPENCER W. CHRISTENSEN
Attorney for Defendant
MEPCO FINANCE CORPORATION

11
12
13

DATED: February 21, 2012

THE MEHDI FIRM

14
By:

15
16
17
18

/s/ Azra Mehdi
AZRA MEHDI
Attorney for Plaintiff
JACKIE L. HIGH, individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated

Pursuant to General Order No. 45 Section X(B), all signatories concur in filing this stipulation.

19
20

Dated: February 21, 2012

By:

/s/ Spencer W. Christensen_______

21
22

S

RT

R NIA

ER

H

28

FO

NO

27

DERED

O OR
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERD
IT IS S
2/22/12
Dated: _________________________
_________________________________________
THE HONORABLE EDWARDhM. CHEN
n
M. C e
Edward
Judge
LI

26

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1214753.1

3

A

25

UNIT
ED

24

RT
U
O

23

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C