Ramirez v. County of Alameda et al

Filing 22

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James granting 21 Stipulation to continue deadline for mediation (rmm2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/12/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

JOHN L. BURRIS, Esq. (SBN 69888)
DeWITT M. LACY, Esq. (SBN 258789)
THE LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS
Airport Corporate Center
7677 Oakport St., Suite 1120
Oakland, CA 94621
T: [phone]
F: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ELISA RAMIREZ, Guardian ad Litem for A.S., minor
THOMAS F. BERTRAND, State Bar No. 056560
MICHAEL C. WENZEL, State Bar No. 215388
BERTRAND, FOX & ELLIOT
The Waterfront Building
2749 Hyde Street
San Francisco, California 94109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, ALAMEDA COUNTY
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT and GREGORY AHERN

17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19
20
21

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ELISA RAMIREZ, Guardian ad Litem for A.S.,
minor,

22
23

Plaintiff,

Case No. C12-4852-MEJ
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING MEDIATION COMPLIANCE
DATE

v.

24
25
26
27

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, ALAMEDA
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT, GREGORY
AHERN, Sheriff,
Defendants.

Hon. Maria-Elena James

28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING MEDIATION COMPLIANCE DATE
Ramirez v. County of Alameda, et al.,
U.S. District Court Case No. 3:12-cv-04852-MEJ

1

STIPULATION

2

Defendants COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,

3

and GREGORY AHERN, sheriff, and Plaintiff ELISA RAMIREZ, Guardian ad Litem for A.S., a minor

4

by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

5

1.

The parties’ initial Case Management Conference was scheduled for December 13, 2012.

6

Pursuant to the Court’s Case Management Order issued on December 10, 2012, the Case Management

7

Conference was vacated and the following discovery and dispositive motion deadlines were set:

8

(A)

Disclosure of Expert Witnesses and Expert Reports to be served by 9/13/2012;

9

(B)

Disclosure of Rebuttal Expert Witnesses to be served by 9/23/2013;

10

(C)

Non-Expert Discovery to be completed by 10/8/2013;

11

(D)

All Dispositive Motions shall be filed, served, and noticed by 11/7/2013; and

12

(E)

The Court shall hear dispositive motions no later than 12/12/2013.

13

2.

By Order dated December 6, 2012, the parties were ordered to complete mediation within

14

120 days from the date of the order. The last day to complete mediation is therefore April 5, 2013.

15

3.

On January 8, 2013, the parties were assigned to H. Jay Folberg for mediation.

16

4.

At this time, Defendants are unable to meaningfully participate in mediation by April 5,

17

2013 for the following reasons:

18

(a)

Pursuant to the Initial Case Management Order and ADR Deadlines, Plaintiff’s

19

initial disclosures were due on December 6, 2012. Plaintiff did not serve their initial disclosures until

20

January 8, 2013, thereby delaying initial discovery necessary for mediation.

21

(b)

Additionally, Defendants propounded written discovery on Plaintiff on January 15,

22

2013. Responses to the written discovery were due February 19, 2013. Defendants sent meet and confer

23

correspondence on February 26, 2013, explaining that no responses were received by that date.

24

Defendants extended Plaintiff’s responsive deadline to March 5, 2013. To date, however, no responses

25

have been received. Responses to the written discovery may result in the need for further discovery,

26

including key witnesses.

27
28

(c)

Plaintiff's failure to provide responses to discovery has delayed Plaintiff's

deposition. Defendants cannot proceed to mediation until Plaintiff's deposition is completed.
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING MEDIATION COMPLIANCE DATE
Ramirez v. County of Alameda, et al.,
U.S. District Court Case No. 3:12-cv-04852-MEJ

1
2

5.

deadline to complete mediation until July 4, 2013, so that the parties can complete necessary discovery.

3
4

For all the good cause stated above, the parties respectfully request this Court extend the

6.

The parties’ request for extension of the mediation compliance deadline will not interfere

with any presently scheduled dates set by the Court.

5

7.

The parties respectfully request that the Court approve this stipulation and incorporate its

6

terms in an Order.

7

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

8

Dated: March 11, 2013

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS

9
By:

10
11
12

/s/ DeWitt Lacey
DeWitt M. Lacey
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ELISA RAMIREZ, Guardian ad Litem for A.S.,
minor

13
14

Dated:

BERTRAND, FOX & ELLIOT

15
By:

16
17
18
19

/s/ Michael Wenzel
Michael C. Wenzel
Attorneys for Defendants
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, ALAMEDA
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARMENT and
GREGORY AHERN

20
ORDER

21
22

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, and the parties’ having stipulated to same, the

23

parties’ stipulation is hereby APPROVED. The deadline for the parties to complete mediation shall be

24

continued until July 4, 2013.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27
28

March 12, 2013
DATED: ________________

__________________________________
HONORABLE MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge
3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING MEDIATION COMPLIANCE DATE
Ramirez v. County of Alameda, et al.,
U.S. District Court Case No. 3:12-cv-04852-MEJ