Aquino v. Rasavi et al
Filing
21
ORDER granting 20 STIPULATION to Continue Case Management Conference 90 Days. Case Management Statement due by 5/30/2017. Case Management Conference continued to 6/6/2017 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 02/01/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/1/2017)
1 Phillip Babich (SBN 269577)
Email: pbabich@reedsmith.com
2 Thuy T. Nguyen (SBN 313144)
Email: tnguyen@reedsmith.com
3 REED SMITH LLP
101 Second Street, Suite 1800
4 San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 543 8700
5 Facsimile: (415) 391 8269
Attorneys for Plaintiff Jorge Aquino
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
REED SMITH LLP
A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware
10
11
12
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
JORGE AQUINO,
13
14
Plaintiff,
v.
15 E. RASAVI, D.D.S.,
16
Defendant.
Case No: 3:16cv3167-WHO
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE 90 DAYS
Judge: Hon. William H. Orrick
Action Filed: June 6, 2016
17
18
19
Plaintiff Jorge Aquino and Defendant Eric Razavi hereby stipulate that the Case
20 Management Conference set for March 7, 2017, be continued ninety (90) days and request that the
21 Court so order. This stipulation and request are made jointly based on the following:
22
1.
The Case Management Conference is set for March 7, 2017 [Dkt. No. 15]. In
23
advance of the conference, the parties are required, per rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules
24
of Civil Procedure and this Court’s Case Management Order dated December 13,
25
2016, to prepare and file a joint Case Management Conference Statement by February
26
27, 2017.
27
28
2.
On January 5, 2017, the Court appointed Phillip Babich and Thuy Nguyen from Reed
Smith LLP for the limited purpose of representing Plaintiff in the course of a
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 90 DAYS
settlement conference [Dkt. No. 18].
1
2
3.
Plaintiff’s counsel and defense counsel have engaged in a meet and confer discussion
3
regarding a discovery plan and the case generally. The parties agree that more time is
4
needed to prepare for a potential settlement, and that it would be premature to draft a
5
joint Case Management Conference Statement until settlement talks have concluded.
6
4.
Therefore, the parties hereby stipulate to and request that the Case Management
7
Conference of March 7, 2017 be continued ninety (90) days and that all related Rule
8
26 obligations be stayed until the Court sets a new date for the Case Management
9
Conference.
REED SMITH LLP
A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware
10
11 It is So Stipulated.
12 Dated: January 27, 2017
13
By
14
15
16
17
18
19
REED SMITH LLP
Dated: January 27, 2017
Phillip Babich
Thuy T. Nguyen
Attorneys for Plaintiff Jorge Aquino
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
By /s/ Harry T. Gower
Harry T. Gower
Attorney for Defendant Eric Razavi, D.D.S.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2–
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 90 DAYS
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3 JORGE AQUINO,
Case No: 3:16cv3167-WHO
4
ORDER RE: STIPULATION TO
CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE 90 DAYS
Plaintiff,
5
6
7
v.
Judge: Hon. William H. Orrick
E. RASAVI, D.D.S.,
Action Filed: June 6, 2016
Defendant.
8
9
REED SMITH LLP
A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware
10
11
Upon consideration of the stipulation and with good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY
12 ORDERED that:
13
(1)
The Case Management Conference, currently set for March 7, 2017, be vacated.
14
(2)
The Case Management Conference is continued to June 6, 2017.
15
(3)
A Joint Case Management Conference Statement shall be filed no later than May 30,
16 2017.
17
IT IS SO ORDERED.
18
19 Dated: February 1, 2017
20
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3–
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 90 DAYS
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?