Macaraeg v. ABM Security Services, Inc. et al
Filing
31
STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE RE DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR TRANSFER OF VENUE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/17/16. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
11
CASE NO.: 3:15-cv-04470-RS
12
13
MICHAEL MACARAEG, on Behalf of
Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated, and as Private Attorney General,
14
15
16
17
18
Plaintiff,
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING
DATE RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
TRANSFER OF VENUE
vs.
ABM SECURITY SERVICES, INC., a
California Corporation; ABM ONSITE
SERVICES – WEST, INC., a Delaware
Corporation; and DOES 1 through 20,
inclusive,
19
20
Defendants.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
[Proposed] Order Granting Stipulation to Continue Hearing Date re Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue
1
2
3
4
[PROPOSED] ORDER
On February 16, 2016, Plaintiff Michael Macaraeg (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants ABM
Security Services, Inc. and ABM Onsite Services – West, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”) filed a
stipulated request to continue the hearing date for Defendants’ motion to transfer venue to the Central
5
District.
6
Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the parties’ request. The motion hearing
7
previously set for March 3, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. is continued to March 10, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. in
8
Courtroom 3.
9
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
11
12
13
2016
2/17
Dated: ____________, 2015
___________________________________
The Honorable Richard Seeborg
United States District Judge
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
[Proposed] Order Granting Stipulation to Continue Hearing Date re Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue
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?