Myles v. Lew

Filing 7

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 6 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER filed by Jacob J. Lew. Case Management Statement due by 6/2/2016. Initial Case Management Conference set for 6/9/2016 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on March 28, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2016)

Download PDF
1 Andrew H. Lee, State Bar No. 257403 LAW OFFICE OF ANDREW H. LEE 2 2021 The Alameda, Suite 310 San Jose, California 95126 3 Telephone: (408) 216-9898 Facsimile: (408) 216-9451 4 Attorney for Plaintiff 5 BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973) 6 Acting United States Attorney 7 SARA WINSLOW (DCBN 457643) Chief, Civil Division 8 ANN MARIE REDING (CABN 226864) 9 Assistant United States Attorney 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 San Francisco, California 94102-3495 Telephone: (415) 436-3618 FAX: (415) 436-6748 annie.reding@usdoj.gov 10 11 12 13 Attorneys for Defendant 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 16 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 17 18 MARCELINE F. MYLES, Plaintiff, 19 20 21 22 23 v. JACOB J. LEW, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY (U.S. MINT), Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 3:16-cv-00239 JST STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CMC 3:16-cv-00239 JST 1 Plaintiff Marceline F. Myles (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Jacob J. Lew, Secretary, Department of 2 3 Treasury (U.S. Mint) (“Defendant”), by and through their respective counsel, make the following 4 representations and stipulate and agree as follows: 1. 5 On January 14, 2016, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this Court. See Docket No. 1. On 6 January 14, 2016, the Court set this case for an April 13, 2016 initial case management conference. Dkt. 7 No. 3. 8 2. On February 16, 2016, the U.S. Attorney’s Office was served with a copy of Plaintiff’s 9 Complaint. Defendant’s responsive pleading is due to be filed on or before April 18, 2016. 10 3. In light of the fact that Defendant has not yet appeared in this action, and will not appear 11 until April 18, 2016, the parties jointly request that the Court continue the initial case management 12 conference and all related dates until June 1, 2016, or later. 1 13 4. No prior extensions of time have been requested or granted. 14 5. The requested time modifications will have no impact on the schedule for this case except 15 as outlined above. 16 DATED: March 28, 2016 Respectfully submitted, 17 ___/s/ Andrew H. Lee_______________________ ANDREW H. LEE Counsel for Plaintiff 18 19 DATED: March 28, 2016 Respectfully submitted, 20 BRIAN J. STRETCH Acting United States Attorney 21 22 ___/s/ Ann Marie Reding 2____________________ ANN MARIE REDING Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant 23 24 25 26 1 Defendants anticipate filing a motion to dismiss in response to the complaint, and that motion is not likely to be heard until May 26, 2016. The parties are also agreeable to a case management 27 conference that coincides with a hearing on Defendant’s motion. 2 I, Ann Marie Reding, hereby attest that I obtained the concurrence in the filing of this 28 document of all signatories whose signatures are represented by /s/. STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CMC 3:16-cv-00239 JST 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 3 Plaintiff and Defendant’s Stipulation and Proposed Order Continuing Initial Case Management Conference is hereby GRANTED. The initial case management conference set for April 13, 2016 is June 9, 2016 continued until June 1, 2016, at 2:00 p.m. A joint case management statement is due to be filed on May 5 June 2, 2016 25, 2016. ISTRIC 6 ES D TC T 28 Date: March ___, 2016 TA 7 _______________________ JON S. TIGAR 8 United States District ERED O ORD Judge IT IS S 9 DIFIED 4 UNIT ED S RT U O ER 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CMC 3:16-cv-00239 JST S . Ti ga r LI n J u d ge J o A H 13 RT 12 NO 11 FO 10 R NIA AS MO N F D IS T IC T O R C

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?