Johnson v. Berger et al

Filing 30

ORDER REOPENING CASE. Case Management Conference set for August 18, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. A Joint Case Management Statement due August 11, 2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 8/2/2016. (lsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/2/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Irene Karbelashvili, State Bar Number 232223
Law Office of Irene Karbelashvili
12 South First Street, Suite 413
San Jose, CA 95113
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Kenneth J. Pinto, State Bar Number 221422
Law Office of Kenneth J. Pinto
12 South First Street, Suite 713
San Jose, CA 95113
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorney for RICHARD JOHNSON, Plaintiff

10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14
15

RICHARD JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

16

vs.

17

ALBERT A. BERGER, an individual, and
PAUL K. BERGER, an individual
collectively d/b/a BURGER PIT;
PAMELA S. KELLEY, an individual,
RANDY A. KELLEY, an individual; and
DOES 1-20,
Defendants.

18
19
20
21

.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 15-cv-04632-LB
Civil Rights
CERTIFICATION BY
PLAINTIFF THAT AGREED
CONSIDERATION HAS NOT
BEEN DELIVERED
AND
REQUEST THAT ORDER OF
CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL BE
VACATED AND CASE BE
RESTORED TO CALENDAR
ORDER

CERTIFICATION BY PLAINTIFF THAT AGREED UPON CONSIDERATION HAS NOT BEEN DELIVERED
AND
REQUEST THAT CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL BE VACATED AND CASE RESTORED TO CALENDAR

Page 1 of 2

FACTS

1
2

On June 23, 2016 an ADR session was held between plaintiff and Defendants. A

3

settlement was entered into by the parties and the case was deemed settled. Plaintiff

4
5
6

RICHARD JOHNSON (hereafter “Plaintiff”) herby certifies through his legal representative,
Kenneth J. Pinto, that he entered into a settlement agreement with Defendants ALBERT A.
BERGER, an individual, and PAUL K. BERGER, an individual collectively d/b/a BURGER
PIT; and PAMELA S. KELLEY, an individual, RANDY A. KELLEY, an

7

individual(hereafter “Defendants”) via their legal representative Samuel Phillips; with terms

8

that the agreed consideration was due 20 business days from June 23, 2016. (July 21, 2016)

9

Plaintiff further certifies that July 21, 2016 has passed and no agreed upon consideration has

10
11

been provided to Plaintiff by the Defendant(s).
Plaintiff believes the conditional order of dismissal should be vacated and that the matter

12

should be restored to the court calendar and set for further proceedings as the court deems

13

proper.

14
15

DATED: August 01, 2016

16

By:/s/ Kenneth J. Pinto
KENNETH J. PINTO
Attorney for Plaintiff RICHARD JOHNSON

17
ORDER

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

PURSUANT TO ORDER OF CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL, IT IS SO ORDERED.
(1)

The order for conditional dismissal is hereby vacated.

(2)

The case is restored to the court’s calendar.

(3)

The matter is to be set for further proceedings as the court deems proper.

The court sets the case for a Case Management Conference on August 18, 2016 at 11:00 a.m.
and directs the filing of a Joint Case Management Statement by August 11, 2016.
2
Dated: August ______, 2016

By:
Laurel Beeler
United States Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of California

25
26
27
28

CERTIFICATION BY PLAINTIFF THAT AGREED UPON CONSIDERATION HAS NOT BEEN DELIVERED
AND
REQUEST THAT CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL BE VACATED AND CASE RESTORED TO CALENDAR

Page 2 of 2