Saitta v. Signal Perfection, Ltd.
Filing
15
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE #9 to Submit Matter to Binding Arbitration and to Dismiss Court Action. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/15/2020. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/15/2020)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
CHARLES L. THOMPSON, IV, CA Bar No. 139927
charles.thompson@ogletree.com
J.P. SCHREIBER, CA Bar No. 317829
john.schreiber@ogletree.com
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone:
415-442-4810
Facsimile:
415-442-4870
Attorneys for Defendant
SIGNAL PERFECTION, LTD.
EDGAR MANUKYAN, CA Bar No. 314606
edgar@manukyanlawfirm.com
MANUKYAN LAW FIRM, APC.
520 E. Wilson Ave. Suite 200
Glendale, CA 91206
Telephone:
818.559.4444
Facsimile:
888.746.4420
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FRANK SAITTA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16
17
FRANK SAITTA, an individual,
Case No. 3:20-cv-05953- RS
18
Plaintiff,
19
v.
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SUBMIT
MATTER TO BINDING ARBITRATION
AND TO DISMISS COURT ACTION
20
21
SIGNAL PERFECTION, LTD., a Florida
Corporation; and DOES 1 through 20,
inclusive,
22
Defendant.
Complaint Filed: July 14, 2020
Trial Date:
Judge:
None Set
Hon. Joseph C. Spero
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:20-cv-05953-JCS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO SUBMIT MATTER TO BINDING ARBITRATION AND TO
DISMISS COURT ACTION
1
2
STIPULATION
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2020, Plaintiff Frank Saitta (“Plaintiff”) filed this action in the
3
Superior Court of California for the County of Alameda against Defendant Signal Perfection, Ltd.
4
(“Defendant”) asserting causes of action for: (1) Failure to Reinstate in Violation of the California
5
Family Rights Act (“CFRA”); (2) Discrimination in Violation of the CFRA; (3) Retaliation in
6
Violation of the CFRA; (4) Disability Discrimination in Violation of the Fair Employment and
7
Housing Act (“FEHA”); (5) Failure to Engage in a Good Faith Interactive Process in Violation of
8
the FEHA; (6) Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation in Violation of the FEHA; (7)
9
Retaliation in Violation of the FEHA; (8) Failure to Prevent Discrimination and Retaliation in
10
Violation of the FEHA; and (9) Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy (the
11
“Action”).
12
WHEREAS, on August 24, 2020, Defendant removed this Action to this Court.
13
WHEREAS, the parties agree that they entered into and are bound by the arbitration
14
agreement signed by Plaintiff on January 9, 2015, with respect to the claims at issue in the Action.
15
16
NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant, by and through their respective counsel,
hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
17
1.
The Action shall be submitted to binding arbitration;
18
2.
The Action shall be dismissed in its entirety, in light of the agreement to arbitrate,
19
without prejudice to refile upon the conclusion of the arbitration to enforce any
20
award, if necessary.
21
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
22
DATED: September 3, 2020
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.
23
24
25
26
27
By: /s/ J.P. Schreiber
CHARLES L. THOMPSON, IV
J.P. SCHREIBER
Attorneys for Defendant
SIGNAL PERFECTION, LTD.
28
1
Case No. 3:20-cv-05953-JCS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO SUBMIT MATTER TO BINDING ARBITRATION AND TO
DISMISS COURT ACTION
1
2
DATED: September 3, 2020
MANUKYAN LAW FIRM, APC.
3
4
By: /s/ Edgar Manukyan
EDGAR MANUKYAN
5
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
FRANK SAITTA
6
7
8
ATTESTATION PER CIVIL L.R. 5-1(i)(3)
9
10
I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each
11 of the other signatories.
12
13
14
15
DATE: September 3, 2020
By: /s/ J.P. Schreiber
J.P. Schreiber
Attorneys for Defendant
SIGNAL PERFECTION, LTD.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No. 3:20-cv-05953-JCS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO SUBMIT MATTER TO BINDING ARBITRATION AND TO
DISMISS COURT ACTION
1
2
ORDER
The above stipulation is approved. This action shall be submitted to binding arbitration, and
3 shall be dismissed in its entirety, in light of the agreement to arbitrate, without prejudice to refile
4 upon the conclusion of the arbitration to enforce any award, if necessary.
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
September 15, 2020
7 DATED: ________________________
8
_______________________________________
HON. RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
43738069.1
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No. 3:20-cv-05953-JCS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO SUBMIT MATTER TO BINDING ARBITRATION AND TO
DISMISS COURT ACTION
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?