Espinal v. Diversified Collection Services, Inc.
Filing
27
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC. CMC WILL PROCEED ON 12/21/12 AT 10:30 A.M. IN COURTROOM 5 BEFORE JUDGE CHEN re 26 Case Management Statement filed by Hildelisa Espinal. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 12/18/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2012)
1
2
3
G. Thomas Martin, III, Esq. (SBN 218456)
PRICE LAW GROUP, APC
15760 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1100
Encino, CA 91436
T: (818) 907-2030; F: (818) 205-2730
tom@plglawfirm.com
4
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
HILDELISA ESPINAL
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
Case No.: C12-00738 EMC
HILDELISA ESPINAL,
12
CASE MANAGEMENT
STATEMENT
Plaintiff,
13
ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC
vs.
14
15
16
DIVERSIFIED COLLECTION
SERVICES, INC.; DOES 1-10,
inclusive.
Case Management Conference:
Date: December 21, 2012
Time: 10:30 a.m.
Courtroom: 5
Hon. Edward M. Chen
Defendants.
17
18
19
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
20
Plaintiff, HILDELISA ESPINAL, through counsel, requests the court to
21
22
move the Case Management Conference referenced above to a date of its choosing
23
in late January 2013.
24
25
///
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
-1-
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
1
2
By: /s/ G. Thomas Martin, III
G. Thomas Martin, III, Esq.
PRICE LAW GROUP, APC
15760 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1100
Encino, CA 91436
Telephone: 818-907-2030
Fax: 818-205-2730
Email: tom@plglawfirm.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Date: December 17, 2012
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
RT
U
O
___________________ ISTRICT
ES D
C
AT
Edward M. Chen
T
U.S. District Judge
14
15
RT
17
. Chen
NO
16
ERED
O ORD D
IT IS S
DIFIE
AS MO
dward M
Judge E
18
A
H
ER
LI
13
UNIT
ED
S
12
R NIA
11
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request to continue the CMC is denied.
The CMC will go forward on 12/21/12 at 10:30 a.m.
FO
10
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
-2-
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?