Moralez v. Lee et al

Filing 14

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION by Judge William Alsup granting 13 Stipulation.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/25/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 Zachary M. Best, SBN 166035 Tanya E. Moore, SBN 206683 MISSION LAW FIRM, A.P.C. 332 North Second Street San Jose, California 95112 Telephone: (408) 298-2000 Facsimile: (408) 298-6046 E-mail: service@mission.legal 5 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Francisca Moralez 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 FRANCISCA MORALEZ, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) vs. ) EUN JOO LEE dba SHARON HEIGHTS ) WINES & LIQUORS; KENNETH S. LEE dba ) SHARON HEIGHTS WINES & LIQUORS; ) ) SHARON HEIGHTS WINE & LIQUOR, ) INC.; RADIN CO., A CALIFORNIA ) ) LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ) No. 3:17-cv-03584-WHA STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LAST DATE TO MEET AND CONFER UNDER GENERAL ORDER 56 AND RELATED DATE; [PROPOSED] ORDER 22 WHEREAS, on June 22, 2017, the Court issued a Scheduling Order for Cases 23 Asserting Denial of Right of Access under the Americans with Disabilities Act (Dkt. 4) (“the 24 Scheduling Order”); 25 WHEREAS, Plaintiff Francisca Moralez (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Eun Joo Lee dba 26 Sharon Heights Wines & Liquors; Kenneth S. Lee dba Sharon Heights Wines & Liquors; 27 Sharon Heights Wines & Liquor, Inc.; and Radin Co., a California Limited Partnership 28 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LAST DATE TO MEET AND CONFER UNDER GENERAL ORDER 56 AND RELATED DATE; [PROPOSED] ORDER Page 1 1 (“Defendants,” and together with Plaintiff, “the Parties”) conducted the joint site inspection 2 required pursuant to General Order 56 and the Scheduling Order on September 28, 2017; 3 4 WHEREAS, the Scheduling Order requires that the Parties, and their counsel, meet and confer in person no later than 28 days after the joint site inspection, here, October 26, 2017; 5 6 WHEREAS, due to the unavailability of defense counsel for Defendants, the Parties cannot complete the meet and confer prior to the deadline; 7 NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated by and between the Parties, through their 8 respective counsel, that the meet and confer required under General Order 56 and this Court’s 9 Scheduling Order take place on November 20, 2017 at 11:00 a.m. The Parties accordingly 10 request an extension of the deadline to complete the meet and confer to November 20, 2017. 11 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that if a settlement of the matter is not reached at the 12 meet and confer, that Plaintiff shall file a Notice of Need for Mediation within 14 days of the 13 meet and confer. 14 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 15 16 Dated: October 25, 2017 MISSION LAW FIRM, A.P.C. 17 /s/ Tanya E. Moore Tanya E. Moore Attorneys for Plaintiff, Francisca Moralez 18 19 20 21 Dated: October 25, 2017 PAHL & McCAY 22 /s/ Servando R. Sandoval Servando R. Sandoval Attorneys for Defendants, Diroug Diekgers dba Eric’s Gourmet Food & Catering; and Radin Co., a California Limited Partnership 23 24 25 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LAST DATE TO MEET AND CONFER UNDER GENERAL ORDER 56 AND RELATED DATE; [PROPOSED] ORDER Page 2 1 ATTESTATION 2 Concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the individual(s) whose electronic signature is attributed above. 3 4 /s/ Tanya E. Moore Tanya E. Moore Attorneys for Plaintiff, Francisca Moralez 5 6 7 ORDER 8 The parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing, 9 10 11 12 13 14 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the in person meet and confer required by this Court’s Scheduling Order and General Order 56 shall take place no later than November 20, 2017. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the parties are unable to reach a settlement of this matter at the in person meet and confer, Plaintiff shall file a Notice of Need for Mediation within 14 days of the meet and confer. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 18 19 Dated: October 25, 2017. United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE LAST DATE TO MEET AND CONFER UNDER GENERAL ORDER 56 AND RELATED DATE; [PROPOSED] ORDER Page 3

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?