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)
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?