Crosthwaite et al v. Legg, Inc. et al

Filing 18

ORDER GRANTING 17 Motion to Continue Case Management Conference. Case Management Statement due by 11/8/2013. Initial Case Management Conference set for 11/15/2013 01:30 PM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on August 16, 2013. (jswlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/16/2013)

Download PDF
Case3:13-cv-01065-JSW Document17 Filed08/16/13 Page1 of 3 1 Michele R. Stafford, Esq. (SBN 172509) Shivani Nanda, Esq. (SBN 253891) 2 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110 3 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: (415) 882-7900 4 Facsimile: (415) 882-9287 mstafford@sjlawcorp.com 5 snanda@sjlawcorp.com 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 F. G. CROSTHWAITE, et al., Plaintiffs, 11 12 v. 13 LEGG, INC., a California corporation; ROBERT PAUL LEGG II, an individual; and 14 LEONARD ANTHONY D’ORAZIO aka SKIP D’ORAZIO, an individual, 15 Defendants. 16 Case No.: C13-1065 JSW PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON Date: Time: Location: Courtroom: Judge: August 23, 2013 1:30 p.m. 450 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco 11, 19th Floor, Honorable Jeffrey S. White 17 18 Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management Conference, currently on calendar 19 for August 23, 2013, be continued for approximately 60 – 90 days. Good cause exists for the 20 granting of the continuance, as follows: 21 1. As the Court’s records will reflect, this action was filed on March 8, 2013. 22 2. The Court continued the previous Case Management Conference to allow for 23 completion of service of process on Defendants, and for Defendants’ response. 24 3. Since then, all Defendants were served and Proofs of Service were filed with the 25 Court. [Dkt. #9, 10 and 12]. Defendants have failed to plead or otherwise defend or appear in this 26 action to date, and the clerk entered Defendants’ defaults on July 5, 2013. [Dkt. #15] The clerk’s 27 notice of default entry was duly served on Defendants, and a Proof of Service was filed with the 28 Court on July 9, 2013. [Dkt. #16] -1REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC Case No.: C13-1065 JSW P:\CLIENTS\OE3CL\Legg, Inc\Pleadings\C13-1065 JSW - Request to Continue CMC 081613.doc Case3:13-cv-01065-JSW Document17 Filed08/16/13 Page2 of 3 1 4. Plaintiffs’ counsel recently discovered that Defendant Legg, Inc. is no longer in 2 business, and are therefore evaluating and investigating whether to proceed with preparation of a 3 Motion for Default Judgment. 4 5. Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management Conference, 5 currently scheduled for August 23, 2013, be continued for 60 - 90 days. There are no issues that 6 need to be addressed by the parties at the currently scheduled Case Management Conference. In 7 the interest of conserving costs as well as the Court’s time and resources, Plaintiffs respectfully 8 request that the Court continue the currently scheduled Case Management Conference. 9 I declare under penalty of perjury that I am the attorney for the Plaintiffs in the above 10 entitled action, and that the foregoing is true of my own knowledge. 11 Executed this 16th day of August, 2013, at San Francisco, California. SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 12 13 By: 14 15 /S/ Shivani Nanda Attorneys for Plaintiffs 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 The currently set Case Management Conference is hereby continued to 18 __________________________ at __________________, and all previously set deadlines and November 15, 2013 1:30 19 dates related to this case are continued accordingly. 20 Date: ____________________ August 16, 2013 21 _________________________________________ HONORABLE JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC Case No.: C13-1065 JSW P:\CLIENTS\OE3CL\Legg, Inc\Pleadings\C13-1065 JSW - Request to Continue CMC 081613.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?