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)
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?