Fanucchi v. Donahoe
Filing
39
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 38 Stipulation filed by Patrick R. Donahoe, Joseph J. Fanucchi. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 12/14/11. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2011)
1
MARY DRYOVAGE
Law Offices of Mary Dryovage
2
3
4
351 California Street, Suite 700
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 593-0095
Fax: (415) 399-8792
Email: mdryovage@igc.org
5
6
7
8
9
10
WENDY MUSELL
Stewart & Musell
351 California Street, Suite 700
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 593-0083
Fax: (415) 520-0920
Email: wmusell@stewartandmusell.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
JOSEPH J. FANUCCHI, M.D.
11
12
13
14
MELINDA HAAG (CSBN 132612)
United States Attorney
JOANN M. SWANSON (CSBN 88143)
Chief, Civil Division
NEILL T. TSENG (CSBN 220348)
Assistant United States Attorney
15
16
17
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055
San Francisco, California 94102-3495
Telephone: (415) 436-7155
FAX: (415) 436-6927
neill.tseng@usdoj.gov
18
19
Attorneys for Defendant
PATRICK R. DONAHOE
20
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
21
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
22
OAKLAND DIVISION
23
24
25
26
27
28
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
PATRICK R. DONAHOE, U.S. Postmaster )
)
General,
)
)
Defendant.
)
JOSEPH J. FANUCCHI, M.D.,
No. C 11-0737 SBA
STIPULATION TO EXTEND
MEDIATION DEADLINE; ORDER
STIPULATION TO EXTEND MEDIATION DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
C 11-0737 SBA
1
Subject to the approval of the Court, and after consultation with the Court’s ADR Unit,
2
the parties, by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to extend the mediation
3
deadline to 90 days after defendant files an answer, if any. The current deadline is 120 days
4
from the date of the Stipulation and Order Selecting ADR Process, which was dated September
5
29, 2011, and filed October 3, 2011.
6
The parties believe good cause exists for this request as follows. Defendant’s motion to
7
dismiss (Doc. #9) has been fully briefed and is awaiting decision. The parties understand from
8
the ADR Unit that it may be easier to assign a mediator once a decision has been issued and any
9
answer has been filed. Additionally, defendant believes mediation would be more productive
10
after its motion to dismiss has been ruled on and any answer has been filed. Although plaintiff is
11
willing to mediate the case at any time, plaintiff does not object to extending the mediation
12
deadline as requested herein.
13
This is the first request to extend the mediation deadline. This Court previously granted
14
defendant’s administrative motion to continue the date of the initial CMC (see Doc. #16) and
15
plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply (see Doc. #25). There is no
16
trial date and there are currently no other case management dates aside from the mediation
17
deadline.
18
19
20
DATED: December 13, 2011
By:
/s/
MARY DRYOVAGE
Attorney for Plaintiff
DATED: December 13, 2011
By:
/s/
WENDY MUSELL
Attorney for Plaintiff
21
22
23
24
25
MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney
26
27
DATED: December 13, 2011
28
By:
/s/
NEILL T. TSENG
STIPULATION TO EXTEND MEDIATION DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
2
C 11-0737 SBA
1
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant
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
STIPULATION TO EXTEND MEDIATION DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
3
C 11-0737 SBA
1
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:
2
3
4
DATED:12/14/11
5
6
_______________________________________
HONORABLE SAUNDRA B. ARMSTRONG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO EXTEND MEDIATION DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
4
C 11-0737 SBA
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?