Moralez v. California Check Cashing Stores, LLC et al

Filing 19

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 18 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER extending deadline to complete joint site inspection filed by Francisca Moralez. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on January 30, 2018. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2018)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 Zachary M. Best, SBN 166035 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 Attorney for Plaintiff, Francisca Moralez 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 FRANCISCA MORALEZ, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) CALIFORNIA CHECK CASHING STORES, ) LLC dba CALIFORNIA CHECK CASHING, ) ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) No. 3:17-cv-06141-JST STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO COMPLETE JOINT SITE INSPECTION REQUIRED BY GENERAL ORDER 56; [PROPOSED] ORDER 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff, Francisca Moralez (“Plaintiff”), and Defendants, California Check Cashing Stores, LLC dba California Check Cashing; and Genirberg Family, LLC, dba The Genirberg Family Limited Partnership (“Defendants,” and together with Plaintiff, “the Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. This action arises out of Plaintiff’s claims that Defendants denied her full and equal access to their public accommodation on account of her disabilities in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and parallel California law. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief under federal and California law, as well as damages under California law. This matter therefore proceeds under this district’s General Order 56 which governs ADA STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO COMPLETE JOINT SITE INSPECTION REQUIRED BY GENERAL ORDER 56; [PROPOSED] ORDER Page 1 1 access matters. 2 2. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The Court has ordered that the Parties conduct a joint site inspection of the subject property on or before February 8, 2018 (Dkt. 4). 3. Counsel for Defendants are unavailable to conduct the joint site inspection prior to the February 8, 2018 deadline. 4. The Parties have agreed to conduct the joint site inspection on February 13, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. unless a settlement is reached prior to that date. 5. Accordingly, the Parties stipulate to extend the deadline to conduct the joint site inspection to February 13, 2018. 10 11 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 12 13 Dated: January 29, 2018 14 MISSION LAW FIRM, A.P.C. /s/ Zachary M. Best Zachary M. Best Attorney for Plaintiff, Francisca Moralez 15 16 17 18 Dated: January 29, 2018 19 /s/ Anthony J. Decristoforo Anthony J. Decristoforo Attorneys for Defendant, California Check Cashing Stores, LLC dba California Check Cashing 20 21 22 23 OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P .C. Dated: January 29, 2018 FERBER LAW 24 25 26 27 /s/ James B. Wickersham James B. Wickersham Attorneys for Defendant, Genirberg Family, LLC, dba The Genirberg Family Limited Partnership 28 STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO COMPLETE JOINT SITE INSPECTION REQUIRED BY GENERAL ORDER 56; [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/ Zachary M. Best Zachary M. Best Attorney for Plaintiff, Francisca Moralez 5 6 7 [PROPOSED] ORDER 8 9 The Parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing, 10 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline for the Parties to complete the joint site 11 inspection is extended to February 13, 2018, with all dates triggered by that deadline continued 12 accordingly. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 17 Dated: January 30, 2018 United States District Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO COMPLETE JOINT SITE INSPECTION REQUIRED BY GENERAL ORDER 56; [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?