Laura Redfern v. Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.

Filing 39

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 38 TO CONTINUE LAST DAY TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS filed by Home Depot U.S.A. Inc. Motion Hearing set for 5/24/2018 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom 05, 17th Floor before Judge Edward M. Chen. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/5/18. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2018)

Download PDF
4 LAFAYETTE & KUMAGAI LLP GARY T. LAFAYETTE (State Bar No. 088666) BRIAN H. CHUN (State Bar No. 215417) 1300 Clay Street, Suite 810 Oakland, California 94612 Telephone: (415) 357-4600 Facsimile: (415) 357-4605 5 Attorneys for Defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. 1 2 3 6 10 CHRISTOPHER B. DOLAN (SBN 165358) EMILE A. DAVIS (SBN 208394) MARI BANDOMA CALLADO (SBN 288320) THE DOLAN LAW FIRM PC 1438 Market Street San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: (415) 421-2800 Facsimile: (415) 421-2830 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff Laura Redfern 7 8 (415) 357-4600 (415) 357-4605 FAX ATTORNEYS AT LAW STREET, SUITE 810 OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94612 12 1300 CLAY LAFAYETTE & KUMAGAI LLP 9 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 16 LAURA REDFERN, an individual. 17 Case No. 3:17-cv-01944 Plaintiff, 18 vs. 19 20 HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., a Delaware Corporation, and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive. 21 STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO CONTINUE LAST DAY TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS; [PROPOSED] ORDER Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO CONTINUE LAST DAY TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS; [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. 3:17-cv-01944 1 2 STIPULATION AND REQUEST Plaintiff Laura Redfern (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. 3 (“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”) through their respective counsel hereby stipulate as 4 follows: 5 WHEREAS the last day to hear dispositive motions is currently May 10, 2018; 6 WHEREAS pursuant to Local Rule 7-2(a), the last day to file dispositive motions is 7 8 9 10 (415) 357-4600 (415) 357-4605 FAX ATTORNEYS AT LAW STREET, SUITE 810 OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94612 12 1300 CLAY LAFAYETTE & KUMAGAI LLP 11 13 14 currently April 5, 2018; WHEREAS the Parties have been engaging in informal settlement discussions and have now reached an agreement on a resolution amount; WHEREAS the Parties are currently finalizing the other terms of the settlement and need additional time to do so; and WHEREAS the Parties desire to avoid the time and expense associated with a dispositive motion if such a filing is unnecessary; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND REQUESTED by and 15 between the Parties through their respective attorneys of record that the last day to hear 16 dispositive motions be continued by two weeks to May 24, 2018. 17 18 19 DATED: April 4, 2018 20 THE DOLAN LAW FIRM /s/ Mari Bandoma Callado MARI BANDOMA CALLADO Attorneys for Plaintiff LAURA REDFERN 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 DATED: April 4, 2018 LAFAYETTE & KUMAGAI LLP /s/ Brian H. Chun BRIAN H. CHUN Attorneys for Defendant HOME DEPOT U.S.A, INC. 28 2 STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO CONTINUE LAST DAY TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS; [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. 3:17-cv-01944 1 SIGNATURE ATTESTATION 2 3 I hereby attest that I have obtained the concurrence of Mari Bandoma Callado, counsel for Plaintiff, for the filing of this stipulation. 4 /s/ Brian H. Chun BRIAN H. CHUN 5 6 7 ORDER 8 Good cause appearing therefor and pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, it is hereby 9 ORDERED that the last day to hear dispositive motions be continued to May 24, 2018 at 1:30 p.m. PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 S United States District Judge hen LI ER FO rd M. C dwa Judge E H 17 DERED R Edward M. Chen IS SO O IT A 16 , 2018 UNIT ED (415) 357-4600 (415) 357-4605 FAX ATTORNEYS AT LAW 15 4/5 RT STREET, SUITE 810 OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94612 14 DATED: NO 1300 CLAY 13 RT U O 12 S DISTRICT TE C TA R NIA 11 LAFAYETTE & KUMAGAI LLP 10 N F D IS T IC T O R C 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO CONTINUE LAST DAY TO HEAR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS; [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. 3:17-cv-01944

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?