Melgar v. CSK Auto, Inc.

Filing 138

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 137 resetting CMC filed by CSK Auto, Inc. Case Management Statement due by 9/28/2017. Further Case Management Conference set for 10/5/2017 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/12/17. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/12/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 MICHAEL MALK (Bar No. 222366) mm@malklawfirm.com MICHAEL MALK, ESQ., APC 1180 South Beverly Drive, Suite 302 Los Angeles, CA 90035 Telephone: 310.203.0016 Facsimile: 310.499.5210 Attorneys for Plaintiff OSMIN MELGAR and KARO KHATCHADOORIAN JAMES M. PETERSON (Bar No. 137837) peterson@higgslaw.com EDWIN M. BONISKE (Bar No. 265701) boniske@higgslaw.com HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP 401 West “A” Street, Suite 2600 San Diego, CA 92101-7913 Telephone: 619.236.1551 Facsimile: 619.696.1410 Attorneys for Defendant CSK AUTO, INC. n/k/a O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 16 17 OSMIN MELGAR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 18 19 20 21 Plaintiff, v. CSK AUTO, INC., an Arizona Corporation, and DOES 1-100, Case No. 3:13-CV-03769 (EMC) STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE CMC Date: CMC Time: August 31, 2017 10:30 AM Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8039039.1 STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 1 This Stipulation and Joint Motion is entered into by and between Plaintiff Osmin Melgar 2 and Karo Khatchadoorian (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant CSK Auto, Inc., n/k/a O’Reilly Auto 3 Enterprises, LLC (“O’Reilly”), through their undersigned counsel of record. The Parties hereby 4 stipulate and agree as follows: 5 1. On May 25, 2017, the Court entered a minute order granting in part, and denying 6 in part, Plaintiffs’ motion to amend the class certification order in this action. The Court ordered 7 the Parties to meet and confer and to submit a proposed joint class notice, and set a further 8 telephonic Case Management Conference for August 31, 2017, at 10:30 AM. The Court also 9 encouraged the Parties to communicate regarding settlement. 10 2. After meeting and conferring, the Parties have agreed to participate in mediation 11 before Hon. William Pate (Ret.), in San Diego, California. The mediation is set for September 7, 12 2017. In light of the confirmed mediation date, the Parties believe that it would be most efficient 13 to continue the pending Case Management Conference until after the mediation. 14 3. The Parties further agree that dissemination of class notice at this time would not 15 be an efficient use of resources, as the parties would have to duplicate those efforts (and costs) 16 again in the event they reach an agreement to resolve the case through mediation. 17 4. Accordingly, the Parties respectfully request that the Court enter an order: (1) 18 continuing the Case Management Conference to one month after the scheduled mediation, to 19 October 5, 2017, subject to the Court’s availability; and (2) defer submission of a proposed joint 20 class notice to coincide with the submission of an updated Case Management Conference 21 Statement on September 28, 2017, subject to the Court’s availability. 22 23 Respectfully Submitted, DATED: July 7, 2017 MICHAEL MALK, ESQ., APC 24 25 By: /s/ Michael Malk MICHAEL MALK. Attorneys for Plaintiff OSMIN MELGAR and KARO KHATCHADOORIAN 26 27 28 8039039.1 2 STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATED: July 7, 2017 6 RT 8 dwar Judge E ER 10 A H 9 D RDERE en d M. Ch NO 7 OO IT IS S By: /s/ James M. Peterson JAMES M. PETERSON, ESQ. EDWIN BONISKE, ESQ. Attorneys for Defendant CSK AUTO, INC. n/k/a O’REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES, LLC FO 5 UNIT ED 4 RT U O S 3 S DISTRICT TE C TA R NIA 2 HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK, LLP LI 1 N F D IS T IC T O R C 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8039039.1 3 STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

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?