Muniz v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

Filing 58

ORDER re 57 Granting Stipulation To (1) Permit Private Mediation; (2) Continue Deadline to File Pretrial Materials; and (3) Continue Pretrial Conference. Final Pretrial Conference set for 9/14/2010 02:00 PM.. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 8/5/2010. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/5/2010)

Download PDF
Muniz v. United Parcel Service, Inc. Doc. 58 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ELENA R. BACA (SB# 160564) elenabaca@paulhastings.com PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP 515 South Flower Street Twenty-Fifth Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-2228 Telephone: (213) 683-6000 Facsimile: (213) 627-0705 KATHERINE C. HUIBONHOA (SB# 207648) katherinehuibonhoa@paulhastings.com RYAN C. HESS (SB# 263079) ryanhess@paulhastings.com PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP 55 Second Street Twenty-Fourth Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-3441 Telephone: (415) 856-7000 Facsimile: (415) 856-7100 Attorneys for Defendant UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. STEPHEN R. JAFFE (SB# 49539) stephenjaffe@gmail.com KATHRYN S. LANDMAN (SB# 260465) THE JAFFE LAW FIRM 101 California Street, Suite 2450 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 618-0100 Facsimile: (415) 618-0080 Attorneys for Plaintiff KIM MUNIZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION KIM MUNIZ, Plaintiff, vs. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., a corporation and DOE 1 through DOE 20, inclusive, Defendant. CASE NO. CV-09-1987 CW JOINT STIPULATION TO (1) PERMIT PRIVATE MEDIATION; (2) CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE PRETRIAL MATERIALS; AND (3) CONTINUE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE; ORDER (AS MODIFIED) CASE NO. CV-09-1987 CW STIP. TO PERMIT PRIVATE MEDIATION AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL FILINGS AND PRETRIAL CONF.; [PROPOSED] ORDER Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, in the Court's July 16, 2010 Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint and Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment ("Summary Judgment Order"), Docket No. 56, at page 30, the Court referred the parties to Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu for a settlement conference; WHEREAS the parties have agreed that private mediation with a particular private mediator, Mark Rudy, might be most productive; WHEREAS the earliest date that the parties were able to schedule for the mediation was August 27, 2010; WHEREAS the parties have scheduled and confirmed the mediation with Mr. Rudy for August 27, 2010; WHEREAS the parties are currently scheduled to submit their pretrial filings on August 24, 2010 (three days prior to the scheduled and confirmed mediation) pursuant to the Court's Order for Pretrial Preparation section 3; WHEREAS the parties are currently scheduled to appear for the pretrial conference on September 7, 2010 pursuant to the Court's August 21, 2009, Minute Order; WHEREAS submitting the pretrial conference materials on August 24, 2010 would require the parties to engage in significant pretrial preparation prior to the mediation, which may fully resolve the case; WHEREAS continuing the pretrial conference and the accompanying filing deadlines for the pretrial filings until after the mediation would save significant resources should the case be resolved at mediation; WHEREAS the parties would have sufficient time to prepare, exchange, meet and confer regarding, and file the various pretrial filings listed in section 3 of the Court's Order for Pretrial Preparation (along with demonstratives) after the mediation if the pretrial conference was continued to September 14, 2010, and the deadline to file the pretrial materials listed in section 3 of the Court's Order for Pretrial Preparation (along with demonstratives) was continued to September 10, 2010; WHEREAS the parties are available to attend a pretrial conference on September CASE NO. CV-09-1987 CW STIP. TO PERMIT PRIVATE MEDIATION; CONTINUE PRETRIAL FILING DEADLINE; AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 14, 2010 at 2:00 pm; IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, through their respective counsel, and subject to Court approval, that: 1. The parties proceed through private mediation, rather than conducting an additional settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Ryu; 2. The deadline to file the pretrial conference materials described in the Court's Order for Pretrial Preparation section 3, along with potential demonstratives, be continued from August 24, 2010 to September 10, 2010; and 3. The pretrial conference set for September 7, 2010 pursuant to the Court's August 21, 2009 Minute Order be continued until September 14, 2010. DATED: August 4, 2010 PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP By: /s/ Ryan C. Hess RYAN C. HESS Attorneys for Defendant UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. DATED: August 4, 2010 THE JAFFE LAW FIRM By: /s/ Stephen R. Jaffe STEPHEN R. JAFFE Attorneys for Plaintiff KIM MUNIZ CASE NO. CV-09-1987 CW -2- STIP. TO PERMIT PRIVATE MEDIATION; CONTINUE PRETRIAL FILING DEADLINE; AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CASE NO. CV-09-1987 CW ORDER Pursuant to the parties' August 4, 2010 stipulation, and good cause appearing, it is ordered that: 1. The parties may proceed through private mediation, rather than conducting an additional settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Ryu; 2. The deadlines to file the pretrial conference materials listed in the Court's Order for Pretrial Preparation section 3, along with potential demonstratives, be continued from August 24, 2010 to September 10, 2010 at noon; 3. The pretrial conference set by the Court's August 21, 2009 Minute Order for September 7, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. be continued until September 14, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 8/5/2010 _________________________________ HON. CLAUDIA WILKEN Judge, U.S. District Court [PROPOSED] ORDER RE STIPULATION

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?