Bay Area Painters & Tapers Pension Trust Fund et al v. Rhodes et al

Filing 9

MODIFIED ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE: Case Management Statement due by 4/23/2013. Case Management Conference set for 4/30/2013 03:00 PM in Courtroom E, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Elizabeth D Laporte on 1/3/2013. (knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2013)

Download PDF
1 ISAIAH ROTER (SBN 82743) SHAAMINI A. BABU (SBN 230704) 2 JULIE A. RICHARDSON (SBN 215202) SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 3 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110 San Francisco, CA 94104 4 (415) 882-7900 (415) 882-9287 – Facsimile 5 iroter@sjlawcorp.com sbabu@sjlawcorp.com 6 jrichardson@sjlawcorp.com 7 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BAY AREA PAINTERS AND TAPERS PENSION TRUST FUND, and its BOARD OF 11 TRUSTEES; LES PROTEAU and CHARLES DEL MONTE, TRUSTEES; 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 ASHLEY HAWLEY RHODES, Individually 15 and dba ASHLEY H. RHODES COMPANY; ASHLEY H. RHODES CO., LLC, a California 16 limited liability company; and DOES 1-20; 17 Case No.: C 12 5583 EDL REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFIED Defendant. 18 19 This action arises under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 20 (“ERISA”), as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (29 U.S.C 21 §§1001-1461 (1982)), to recover withdrawal liability amounts owed by Defendants ASHLEY 22 HAWLEY RHODES, individually and dba ASHLEY H. RHODES COMPANY and ASHLEY H. 23 RHODES CO., LLC, a California limited liability company (collectively, “Defendants”) to 24 Plaintiffs Bay Area Painters and Tapers Pension Trust Fund and its Board of Trustees: Les Proteau 25 and Charles Del Monte (collectively “Plaintiffs”). 26 1. On October 31, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint in this matter. Dkt. #1. Service 27 was personally effectuated on Defendants on December 7, 2012. However, Proofs of Service of 28 1 REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No.: C 12 5583 EDL P:\CLIENTS\PATWL\CASES\Ashley H. Rhodes Company\Pleadings\CMC\Request to Continue CMC 01-02-13.DOC 1 Summons have not been filed with the Court because the Proofs have not been received from the 2 process server to date. 3 2. The deadline for Defendants to file a responsive pleading was on December 28, 4 2012. Plaintiffs anticipate filing a Request for Entry of Default against the Defendants. 5 3. The Initial Case Management Conference in this action has been set by the Court 6 for January 29, 2013, with a Case Management Statement due on January 22, 2013, and a meet 7 and confer and ADR certification required by January 8, 2013. 8 4. The requested extension will modify the ADR Scheduling Order filed on October 9 31, 2012 (Dkt #3). There are no issues that need to be addressed at the currently scheduled Case 10 Management Conference, since no defendant has appeared. 11 5. Plaintiffs believe that the requested continuance would promote the interests of 12 judicial economy and fairness, and will help effectuate a just, speedy and inexpensive 13 determination of this action. See FED. R. CIV. P. 1. 14 6. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management Conference, currently 15 scheduled for January 29, 2013, and all related dates, be continued for 90 days. 16 17 18 Dated: January 3, 2013 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION By: 19 20 21 /S/ JULIE A. RICHARDSON Attorneys for Plaintiffs, BAY AREA PAINTERS & TAPERS PENSION TRUST FUND, et al. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No.: C 12 5583 EDL P:\CLIENTS\PATWL\CASES\Ashley H. Rhodes Company\Pleadings\CMC\Request to Continue CMC 01-02-13.DOC 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 3 ORDER Based on the foregoing Stipulation of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 3:00 p.m. 4 currently set Case Management Conference is hereby continued to April 30, 2013 at 10:00 5 a.m. All related deadlines are extended accordingly. 6 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. January 3, 2013 Dated: _______________________ __________________________________ Honorable Elizabeth D. Laporte UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No.: C 12 5583 EDL P:\CLIENTS\PATWL\CASES\Ashley H. Rhodes Company\Pleadings\CMC\Request to Continue CMC 01-02-13.DOC 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I, the undersigned, declare: I am a citizen of the United States and am employed in the County of San Francisco, State 3 4 of California. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to this action. My business address is 5 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110, San Francisco, California 94104. On January 3, 2013, I served the following document: 6 REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 on the interested parties to this action, addressed as follows, in the manner described below: XX MAIL by placing the envelope for collection and mailing on the date shown above following our ordinary business practices. Being readily familiar with this business’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing, on the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed enveloped with postage fully prepaid, as addressed below: Ashley H Rhodes Ashley H Rhodes Co., LLC 376 Bradford Street San Francisco, CA 94110 16 17 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this 18 declaration was executed on this 3rd day of January, 2013 at San Francisco, California. 19 20 21 _______________/s/_________________ Barbara Savino 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No.: C 12 5583 EDL P:\CLIENTS\PATWL\CASES\Ashley H. Rhodes Company\Pleadings\CMC\Request to Continue CMC 01-02-13.DOC

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?