Sedell v. Wells Fargo of California Insurance Services, Inc. et al

Filing 44

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE HEARING DATE: Settlement Conference set for 5/31/2012 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom C, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 3/30/2012. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/30/2012)

Download PDF
1 ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP 2 BALDWIN J. LEE (BAR NO. 187413) ALEXANDER NESTOR (BAR NO. 202795) 3 Three Embarcadero Center, 12th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-4074 4 Phone: (415) 837-1515 Fax: (415) 837-1516 5 E-Mail: blee@allenmatkins.com anestor@allenmatkins.com 6 Attorneys for Defendants 7 WELLS FARGO INSURANCE SERVICES USA, INC., H. DAVID WOOD, BRIAN M. HETHERINGTON, 8 SAMUEL L. JONES III, MARK W. STOKES, and PAMELA HENDRICKS 9 10 STEVEN D. ZAVODNICK (BAR NO. 135419) 900 East Hamilton Ave., Suite 100 11 Campbell, CA 95008 Mailing Address: 12 P.O. Box 33247 Los Gatos, CA 95031 13 Phone: (408) 399-3100 Fax: (408) 384-5002 14 Attorneys for Plaintiff 15 STEVEN H. SEDELL 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – OAKLAND DIVISION 18 STEVEN H. SEDELL, Plaintiff, 19 20 vs. Case No. CV-10-04043 SBA (LB) PARTIES' JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE HEARING DATE 21 WELLS FARGO OF CALIFORNIA INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., a California 22 Corporation, ACORDIA OF CALIFORNIA INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., a California 23 Corporation, DAVID J. ZUERCHER, an individual, H. DAVID WOOD, an individual, 24 BRIAN M. HETHERINGTON, an individual, SAMUEL L. JONES III, MARK W. STOKES, 25 an individual PAMELA HENDRICKS, an individual, AND does 1-100, inclusive, 26 Defendants. 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 819661.01/SF Case No. CV-10-04043 SBA (LB) PARTIES' STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MSC HEARING DATE JOINT STIPULATION 1 Plaintiff STEVEN H. SEDELL ("Plaintiff") and Defendants WELLS FARGO 2 3 INSURANCE SERVICES USA, INC., H. DAVID WOOD, BRIAN M. HETHERINGTON, 4 SAMUEL L. JONES III, MARK W. STOKES, and PAMELA HENDRICKS (collectively, 5 “Defendants”) stipulate, as follows: WHEREAS, Defendants' summary judgment motion was set for hearing on February 28, 6 7 2012; 8 WHEREAS, Judge Armstrong has taken the summary judgment motion under submission; 9 WHEREAS, the parties believe that the resolution of Defendants' summary judgment 10 motion would affect substantially the parties' settlement positions; 11 THEREFORE, the parties stipulate and respectfully request that this Court continue the 12 mandatory settlement conference currently scheduled on March 14, 2012, to April 27, 2012. 13 IT IS SO STIPULATED THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 14 15 Dated: March 9, 2012 16 By: 17 18 /s/ Steven D. Zavodnick STEVEN D. ZAVODNICK Attorney for Plaintiff 19 20 Dated: March 9, 2012 ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP 21 22 By: 23 24 /s/ Baldwin J. Lee BALDWIN J. LEE ALEXANDER NESTOR Attorneys for Defendants 25 26 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 819661.01/SF -2- Case No. CV-10-04043 SBA (LB) PARTIES' STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MSC HEARING DATE ORDER 1 2 Pursuant to the parties' Joint Stipulation, and Good Cause appearing therefor, the Court 3 hereby orders that the settlement conference scheduled for March 14, 2012, is continued to April 4 27, 2012. May 31, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. The Settlement Conference Order issued on March 7, 2011, Docket No. 15 remains in affect. Please report 5 to 450 Golden Gate Ave, 15th Floor, Courtroom C, SF, CA 94102. IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 8 Dated: March 30, 2012 HON. LAUREL BEELER 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 819661.01/SF -3- Case No. CV-10-04043 SBA (LB) PARTIES' STIP AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MSC HEARING DATE

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?