Narog v. City of Redwood City et al
Filing
97
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: Re 96 Letter filed by Cory Narog. Settlement Conference reset to 2/6/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom C, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 1/22/2015. (lsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2015)
J IVAKA C ANDAPPA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
739 East Walnut Street, Suite 204
Pasadena, CA 91101
T 626 345 5334
jcandappa@candappalaw.com
January 21, 2015
Hon. Laurel Beeler, U.S. Magistrate
United States District Court
Northern District of California
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Courtroom C - 15th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
Re.
Coy Narog v. City of Redwood City et al.
Case No: C13-3237 DMR (LB)
Request to Continue Settlement Conference
Your Honor:
Plaintiff Cory Narog and his counsel respectfully request the Court to continue the
settlement conference currently scheduled for January 23, 2015, to February 6, 2015. Mr.
Narog woke up this morning suffering from flu-like symptoms and it is unlikely that he
will recover by the 23rd. Additionally, given the likelihood that Mr. Narog is suffering
from a viral infection, Plaintiff’s counsel would prefer that the settlement conference be
continued for a couple of weeks.
Counsel for the parties have met and conferred on this matter and are available on
February 6, 2015, if the Court’s schedule so permits. Defendants do not object to
continuing the settlement conference on the basis of Plaintiff’s request.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Jivaka Candappa
Jivaka Candappa
Attorney for Plaintiff Cory Narog
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Melissa M. Holmes
Melissa M. Holmes
Attorney for City of Redwood
City Defendants
The Settlement Conference is reset to February 6, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T
FO
RT
A
H
ER
R NIA
eeler
aurel B
Judge L
LI
UNIT
ED
VED
APPRO
NO
RT
U
O
S
Dated: January 22, 2015
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
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?