Orozco v. Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company et al

Filing 13

ORDER re 12 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Continuing Deadline to Complete Mediation filed by Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company. Further Case Management Conference reset for 10/12/2012 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 7/5/2012. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/5/2012)

Case3:11-cv-05756-CRB Document12 Filed07/02/12 Page1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
William J. Dritsas (SBN 97523)
[e-mail]
Eden Anderson (SBN 233464)
[e-mail]
560 Mission Street, 31st Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
TESORO REFINING AND MARKETING
COMPANY
LAW OFFICES OF RANDAL M. BARNUM
Randal M. Barnum (SBN 111287)
Lindsay R. Batcha (SBN 264192)
279 East H Street
Benicia, CA 94510
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
BULMARO OROZCO

13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17

BULMARO OROZCO,
Plaintiff,

18
19
20
21

Case No. C 11-5756 CRB
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINE
TO COMPLETE MEDIATION

v.
TESORO REFINING AND MARKETING
COMPANY, EAGLE REFINERY, and DOES
1 - 50, inclusive,,

Date Action Filed: October 11, 2011

Defendants.

22
23
24
25
26

Plaintiff Bulmaro Orozco and Defendant Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company,
collectively “the Parties”, by and through their counsel, stipulate and agree as follows:
1.

WHEREAS, this action was filed on October 11, 2011.

27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINE TO COMPLETE MEDIATION
NO. 11-CV-05756-CRB

Case3:11-cv-05756-CRB Document12 Filed07/02/12 Page2 of 4

1

2.

WHEREAS, the Court held an initial Case Management Conference (“CMC”) on

2

March 16, 2012. At the CMC, the Court set July 13, 2012 as the deadline for the Parties to

3

complete mediation.

4

3.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges three causes of action. The First Cause

5

of Action alleged is for disability discrimination, failure to engage in the interactive process,

6

failure to accommodate disability, and failure to prevent discrimination in violation of

7

California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. The Second Cause of Action alleged is for

8

retaliation for taking medical leave in violation of the California Family Rights Act. The Third

9

Cause of Action alleged is for tortious discharge in violation of public policy. Among other items

10

of alleged damage, Plaintiff seeks to recover damages for alleged “emotional distress,

11

embarrassment, humiliation, and mental anguish.”

12

4.

WHEREAS, because Plaintiff’s alleged disability is issue in the case, as well as his

13

claim for emotional distress damages, Defendant began the process in January 2012 of seeking

14

Plaintiff’s medical and psychiatric records from his treating health care providers at Kaiser

15

Permanente (“KP”).

16
17
18

5.

WHEREAS, due to various mishaps described infra, KP has yet to release any of

Plaintiff’s psychiatric records.
6.

WHEREAS, in a January 25, 2012 letter, defense counsel provided Plaintiff’s

19

counsel with a KP Authorization for Use or Disclosure of Patient Health Information

20

(“Authorization”) and asked that the Authorization be signed and returned to defense counsel so

21

that the subject medical and psychiatric records could then be subpoenaed from KP.

22

7.

WHEREAS, although Plaintiff signed the Authorization, he did not return it to his

23

counsel, but instead delivered it to KP. As a result, a new Authorization needed to be prepared to

24

begin the subpoena process. Thus, on March 15, 2012, defense counsel provided a new

25

Authorization to Plaintiff’s counsel via e-mail.

26
27

8.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff promptly signed the Authorization on March 26. However,

it was inadvertently not provided to defense counsel until April 16, 2012.

28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINE TO COMPLETE MEDIATION
NO. 11-CV-05756-CRB

Case3:11-cv-05756-CRB Document12 Filed07/02/12 Page3 of 4

1

9.

WHEREAS, the Authorization and accompanying subpoena were thereafter served

2

on KP. Unfortunately, Plaintiff’s signature on the Authorization was dated March 26, 2013 and

3

KP would not honor a post-dated Authorization.

4

10.

WHEREAS, the process of obtaining a signed Authorization thus began anew in

5

June 2012 when the error was discovered. While Defendant has received some of Plaintiff’s

6

medical records from KP, it has not yet received Plaintiff’s psychiatric records which are relevant

7

to Plaintiff’s alleged mental disability and emotional distress claim.

8
9

11.

WHEREAS, defense counsel would prefer to have these key documents in hand

before commencing Plaintiff’s deposition. In addition, Defendant’s efforts to obtain key

10

documents from Plaintiff’s union has, to date, been unsuccessful. A subpoena requesting the

11

production of various documents from Plaintiff’s union was served on May 17, 2012. (An earlier

12

subpoena was, at the Union’s request, served on the Union’s counsel, but the Union then claimed

13

improper service.) No response or objections were received by the June 1, 2012 deadline to

14

respond. It appears it may become necessary for Court intervention to enforce the subpoena.

15

12.

WHEREAS, in addition to this litigation, Plaintiff is pursuing a grievance against

16

Defendant relating to his termination. An arbitration of that grievance is set to begin on August

17

30, 2012.

18

13.

WHEREAS, the Parties believe that it would not be productive to engage in

19

mediation until after certain depositions have occurred, including Plaintiff’s deposition and that of

20

his former supervisor, John Zamarripa, as well as a person most knowledgeable at Tesoro

21

concerning the reasons for Plaintiff’s termination. In addition, mediation would be more

22

productive if scheduled to occur after the above mentioned arbitration.

23
24

14.

WHEREAS, the undersigned defense counsel has a family vacation planned for

September 2-11, 2012.

25

NOW THEREFORE, all Parties hereto stipulate and agree, and request, that the Court

26

enter an Order continuing the deadline to complete mediation for 90 days (i.e., to October 11,

27

2012).

28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINE TO COMPLETE MEDIATION
NO. 11-CV-05756-CRB

Case3:11-cv-05756-CRB Document12 Filed07/02/12 Page4 of 4

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

1
2
3
4

DATED: June 29, 2012

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

5
6
By:/s/ Eden Anderson
William J. Dritsas
Eden Anderson
Attorneys for Defendant
TESORO REFINING AND MARKETING
COMPANY

7
8
9
10

DATED: June 29, 2012

LAW OFFICES OF RANDAL M. BARNUM

11
12

By:/s/ Randal M. Barnum
Randal M. Barnum
Carrie E. Croxall
Attorneys for Petitioner
BULMARO OROZCO

13
14
15

ORDER

16
17

Good cause appearing therefor,

18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Case Management Conference continued to October 12, 2012 at 8:30 a.m.

RT

25

harle
Judge C

27

yer

s R. Bre

ER

H

26

R NIA

ERED

LI

24

O ORD
IT IS S

A

23

RT
U
O

22

`

ICT
S
______________________________________
TE
C
Hon. Charles R. Breyer
TA
United States District Judge

NO

21

DISTR

July 5, 2012

FO

Dated:

UNIT
ED

20

S

19

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

28
4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINE TO COMPLETE MEDIATION
NO. 11-CV-05756-CRB
14597228v.1