Doe v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Filing
23
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 22 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Private ADR by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Jane Doe filed by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on August 24, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2016)
Reset Form
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JANE DOE
,
CASE No C 3:16-CV-2298 JST
Plaintiff(s)
v.
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY
,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
Defendant(s)
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:
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
x Private ADR (specify process and provider)
ADR provider to be determined.
Note: Magistrate judges do not conduct
mediations under ADR L.R. 6. To request an
early settlement conference with a Magistrate
Judge, you must file a Notice of Need for
ADR Phone Conference. Do not use this
form. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR
L.R. 3-5.
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
x the presumptive deadline (90 days from the date of the order referring the case to ADR,
unless otherwise ordered. )
other requested deadline:
Date: August 24, 2016
/s/ James P. Keenley
Attorney for Plaintiff
Date: August 24, 2016
/s/ Peter J. Felsenfeld
Attorney for Defendant
Print Form
X IT IS SO ORDERED
IT IS SO ORDERED WITH MODIFICATIONS:
Date:
August 24, 2016
U.S. DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE
HON. JON S. TIGAR
Important! E-file this form in ECF using the appropriate event among these choices: “Stipulation & Proposed Order
Selecting Mediation” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting ENE” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting
Private ADR.”
Form ADR-Stip rev. -2016
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?