Boconvi et al v. Velocity Express, LLC et al

Filing 38

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 37 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Joint Stipulation Regarding Briefing Schedule filed by James R Mack, Claude K Boconvi. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on July 7, 2017. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/7/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ROBERT G. HULTENG, Bar No. 071293 rhulteng@littler.com AURELIO J. PÉREZ, Bar No. 282135 aperez@littler.com BYUNG-KWAN PARK, Bar No. 306719 bpark@littler.com LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 333 Bush Street, 34th Floor San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: (415) 433-1940 Fax: (415) 399-8490 Attorneys for Defendants VELOCITY EXPRESS, LLC and TRANSFORCE, INC. and DYNAMEX OPERATIONS EAST, LLC 14 Timothy J. Becker (MN Bar No. 256663) tbecker@johnsonbecker.com Jacob R. Rusch (MN Bar No. 391892) jrusch@johnsonbecker.com Molly E. Nephew (MN Bar No. 397607) mnephew@johnsonbecker.com JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC 444 Cedar Street, Suite 1800 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Telephone: 612.436.1800 Facsimile: 612.436.1801 15 Trial Counsel for Plaintiffs 10 11 12 13 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 18 19 CLAUDE K. BOCONVI and JAMES R. MACK, Plaintiffs, 20 21 22 23 24 v. Case No. 3:17-cv-02623-JST Assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Jon S. Tigar JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE VELOCITY EXPRESS, LLC a whollyowned subsidiary of Dynamex Operations East, LLC, TRANSFORCE, INC., and DYNAMEX OPERATIONS EAST, LLC, Defendants. Complaint Filed: 1st Amended Complaint Filed: 2nd Amended Complaint Filed: 3rd Amended Complaint Filed: 4th Amended Complaint Filed: Nov. 9, 2012 Jan. 8, 2013 July 18, 2013 Mar. 28, 2014 June 26, 2014 25 26 27 28 JT STIP RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. 3:17-cv-02623-JST 1 On July 6, 2017, the Court continued the hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and 2 Costs from August 17, 2017, to September 21, 2017. Following a short meet-and-confer regarding 3 the current briefing schedule for Plaintiffs’ Motion, the Parties agreed to the following amended 4 briefing deadlines with respect to Plaintiffs’ forthcoming Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs: 5 Original Date 6 New Date Plaintiffs’ Motion July 14, 2017 August 2, 2017 Defendants’ Opposition July 31, 2017 August 18, 2017 Plaintiffs’ Reply August 7, 2017 August 25, 2017 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Under the original briefing schedule, Plaintiffs’ Motion was to be fully briefed 10 days prior to the hearing date. Under the new briefing schedule, briefing will conclude 25 days prior to the hearing date. The amended schedule will not prejudice either party and no other extension has been requested. SO STIPULATED. Dated: July 7, 2017 /s/ Byung-Kwan Park ____________________ ROBERT G. HULTENG AURELIO J. PÉREZ BYUNG-KWAN PARK LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants VELOCITY EXPRESS, LLC and TRANSFORCE, INC. and DYNAMEX OPERATIONS EAST, LLC Dated: July 7, 2017 /s/ Jacob R. Rusch_______________________ TIMOTHY J. BECKER JACOB R. RUSCH MOLLY E. NEPHEW JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC Trial Counsel for Plaintiffs 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JT STIP RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE 1. Case No. 3:17-cv-02623-JST 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 3 July 7 Dated: ____________________, 2017 4 5 THE HONORABLE JON S. TIGAR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JT STIP RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE 2. Case No. 3:17-cv-02623-JST 1 2 3 ATTESTATION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL L.R. 5-1(i)(3) I, Jacob Rusch, declare under penalty of perjury and pursuant to the laws of California and the United States that I have in my possession e-mail correspondence from Byung-Kwan Park that the 4 content of this Joint Stipulation is acceptable to all persons required to sign it. 5 /s/ Jacob R. Rusch Jacob R. Rusch JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JT STIP RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE 3. Case No. 3:17-cv-02623-JST

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?