Ho v. Bay Area Rapid Transit District
Filing
18
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 16 Stipulation selecting Early Neutral Evaluation (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/28/2015)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jerry Ho et. a!.
Plaintiff(s),
CASE NO. C-15-01128 HSG
v.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORbER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
Bay Area Rapid Transit District,
Defendant(s)..
l ..
------------------~
Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the
following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5:
The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process:
Court Processes:
D
Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4)
X
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. S)
D
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
'
----(Note: Parties whooelieve that an early settlement conference with a Magistrate Judge is
appreciably more likely to meet their needs than.any other form ofADR must participate in an
ADR phone col'!forence and may not file this form. They must insteadfile a Notice ofNeed for
ADR Phone Conforence. See Civil Local Rule 16-BandADR L.R. 3-5)
Private Process:
D
Private ADR (please identify process and provider) - - - - - - - - -
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
X
the presumptive deadlinl) (The deadline is 90 days from the date ofthe order
referring the case to ari ADR process unless otherwise ordered.)
D
other requested d e a d l i n e - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated: May 21,2015
Dated: May 21, 2015
CONTINUE TO FOLLOWING PAGE
[PROPOSED) ORDER
D
X
D
The parties' stipulation is adopted and IT IS SO ORDERED.
The parties' stipulation is modified as follows, and IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 5/28/2015
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
JUDGE
When filing this document in ECF, please be sure to use the appropriate Docket
Event, e.g., "Stipulation and Proposed Order Selecting Mediation."
Rev. 12/11
Page 2 of2
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?