Vietnam Veterans of America et al v. Central Intelligence Agency et al

Filing 507

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken Granting 506 Motion To Reschedule Settlement Conference. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/12/2013)

Download PDF
  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 JAMES P. BENNETT (CA SBN 65179) JBennett@mofo.com EUGENE ILLOVSKY (CA SBN 117892) EIllovsky@mofo.com STACEY M. SPRENKEL (CA SBN 241689) SSprenkel@mofo.com BEN PATTERSON (CA SBN 268696) BPatterson@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522   8 9 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Vietnam Veterans of America; Swords to Plowshares: Veterans Rights Organization; Bruce Price; Franklin D. Rochelle; Larry Meirow; Eric P. Muth; David C. Dufrane; Kathryn McMillan-Forrest; Tim Michael Josephs; and William Blazinski 11 Counsel for Defendants Listed on Signature Page 12   13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 OAKLAND DIVISION       16   17 VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA et al.,   18 Plaintiffs, v.   20 JOINT MOTION TO RESCHEDULE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND ORDER   CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY et al.,   21 CV 09-0037-CW     19 Case No. Complaint filed January 7, 2009 Defendants.   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   JOINT MOTION TO RESCHEDULE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND ORDER CASE NO. CV 09-0037-CW sf-3249034 1 On February 6, 2013, the Court granted the parties’ request to refer the case to Chief   2 Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte for a further settlement conference on March 13, 2013. 3 (Docket No. 505.) The parties have since been informed by Judge Laporte’s chambers that Judge 4 Laporte is not available for a settlement conference any day before the March 14, 2013 hearing on 5 the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (except February 20, which did not work for the 6 parties).           7 The parties have been informed by Judge Laporte’s chambers that Judge Laporte is   8 available for a settlement conference on a mutually agreeable date before the end of May. With 9 the Court’s permission, the parties would like to reschedule the settlement conference to a date     10 consistent with Judge Laporte’s proposal. The parties have engaged in informal settlement 11 discussions since the April 5, 2012 hearing regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, 12 and expect to continue to do so until the formal settlement conference before Judge Laporte. 13 Dated: February 11, 2013 Respectfully submitted, 14 JAMES P. BENNETT EUGENE ILLOVSKY STACEY M. SPRENKEL BEN PATTERSON IAN GERSHENGORN Deputy Assistant Attorney General MELINDA L. HAAG United States Attorney         15 16   17 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 18 /s/ Eugene Illovsky EUGENE ILLOVSKY   19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Attorneys for Plaintiffs /s/ Joshua E. Gardner JOSHUA E. GARDNER Senior Counsel KIMBERLY L. HERB LILY SARA FAREL BRIGHAM JOHN BOWEN JUDSON O. LITTLETON RYAN PARKER Trial Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch P.O. Box 883 Washington, D.C. 20044 Telephone: (202) 305-7583 Facsimile: (202) 616-8470 E-mail: joshua.e.gardner@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants   JOINT MOTION TO RESCHEDULE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND ORDER CASE NO. CV 09-0037-CW sf-3249034 1   2 ORDER   3 The Court hereby GRANTS the parties’ Joint Motion to Reschedule the Settlement 4 Conference. The parties shall coordinate with Chief Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte to 5 schedule a settlement conference before the end of May 2013. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. The Magistrate Judge is requested to advise the parties of any earlier date that might become available and the parties are ordered to make themselves available earlier if at all possible. 7   8 9 Dated: 2/12/2013   10 11 12 The Honorable Claudia Wilken Chief District Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of California   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28 JOINT MOTION TO RESCHEDULE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND ORDER CASE NO. CV 09-0037-CW

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?