Ramos v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Company

Filing 51

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 50 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Joint Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re Continuance of Case Management Conference filed by Anthony Ramos. Further Case Management Conference set for 8/21/2013 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on June 28, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/28/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Terrence J. Coleman (State Bar No. 172183) Brian H. Kim (State Bar No. 215492) PILLSBURY & LEVINSON, LLP The Transamerica Pyramid 600 Montgomery St., 31st Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 433-8000 Facsimile: (415) 433-4816 Email: rgrey@pillsburylevinson.com bkim@pillsburylevinson.com Attorneys for Plaintiff, ANTHONY RAMOS 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTHONY RAMOS, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 vs. UNITED OF OMAHA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 15 Defendants. 16 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. C 12-3761 JST JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 17 JOINT STIPULATION 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiff Anthony Ramos and Defendant United of Omaha Life Insurance Company hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. On June 6, 2013, the parties argued their cross-motions for judgment under Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure before the Court. 2. On June 25, 2013, the Court on its motion continued the June 26, 2013 Case Management Conference to July 31, 2013. 3. From July 26, 2013 until August 9, 2013, Plaintiff’s counsel will be in the East Coast on 26 a prepaid and previously reserved vacation and will therefore be unavailable for the currently 27 rescheduled July 31, 2013 Case Management Conference. 28 -1JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case No. C 12-3761 JST 1 4. On June 26, 2013, Plaintiff’s counsel contacted Defendant’s counsel via telephone and 2 informed him of Plaintiff counsel’s unavailability from July 26, 2013 until August 9, 2013 and 3 specifically for the July 31, 2013 Case Management Conference. Defendant’s counsel stated that he 4 will be unavailable on August 14, 2013 due to a prepaid and previously reserved vacation, but would 5 be available on August 21, 2013 for a rescheduled Case Management Conference. 6 5. Good cause exists to continue the July 31, 2013 Case Management Conference, because 7 Plaintiff’s counsel will be in the East Coast on a prepaid and previously reserved vacation during that 8 date. Plaintiff’s counsel has met and conferred with Defendant’s counsel and the parties have jointly 9 determined that the parties would be mutually available to attend a rescheduled Case Management 10 Conference on August 21, 2013. 11 12 6. WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that the Court continue the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for July 31, 2013 to August 21, 2013. 13 14 15 IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: June 27, 2013 PILLSBURY & LEVINSON, LLP 16 17 By: /s/ Brian H. Kim Terrence J. Coleman Brian H. Kim Attorneys for Plaintiff, ANTHONY RAMOS 18 19 20 21 Dated: June 27, 2013 22 BARGER & WOLEN LLP By: /s/ J. Russell Stedman J. Russell Stedman Brendan V. Mullan Attorneys for Defendant, UNITED OF OMAHA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 23 24 25 26 /// 27 /// 28 -2JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case No. C 12-3761 JST 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation above, and with good cause appearing therefore, 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for July 31, 4 2013 shall be continued to August 21, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 8 DATED: June 28, 2013 _____________________________ HON. JON S. TIGAR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case No. C 12-3761 JST

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?