Kihagi v. City of San Francisco

Filing 26

ORDER re 22 Stipulation to Continue Hearing Dates Re: 1. City's Motion to Stay; 2) Initial Case Management Conference. Responses due by 8/13/2015. Replies due by 8/20/2015. Motion Hearing continued to 9/17/2015 at 11:00 AM. Case Management Conference continued to 10/20/2015 at 01:30 PM. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 07/17/2015. (kawlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/17/2015)

Download PDF
1 Julie N. Nong (SBN 208013) 2 NT Law 2600 W. Olive Ave., 5th Fl., #647 3 Burbank, CA 91505 4 Tel: (888) 588-0428 Fax: (888) 588-0427 5 Email: julienong@ntlawgroup.com 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Anna Kihagi, Xelan Prop 1, LLC, 7 Renka Prop, LLC, and Zoriall LLC 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 10 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) CASE No. 15-cv-01168 KAW ) ) ) ) ) ) STIPULATION TO CONTINUE Plaintiffs, ) HEARING DATES RE: vs. ) 1. City’s Motion to Stay ) CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO, 2. Initial Case Management ) CALIFORNIA, a California public Conference facilities corporation; VICTORIA L. ) WEATHERFORD, a natural person; ) MICHAEL WEISS, a natural person, ) Complaint filed: March 12, 2015 TONY PELEA, a natural person; MARICIO HERNANDDEA, a natural ) Trial Date: None person and DOES 1-30, inclusive, ) ) Defendants. ) ANNA KIHAGI, an individual, 12 XELAN PROP 1, LLC, a California limited liability company, RENKA 13 PROP, LLC, a California limited liability company, and ZORIALL 14 LLC, a California limited liability company, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 THE PARTIES BY AND THROUGH THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD 25 HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 26 27 WHEREAS on May 18, 2015, plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint in 1 28 STIPULATION 1 2 3 4 5 this matter in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; WHEREAS on June 30, 2015, the City filed a motion to stay proceeding with a hearing date of August 6, 2015; responses and replies due on July 14, 2015 and July 21, 2015, respectively; WHEREAS an initial case management conference is currently set for August 6 11, 2015; 7 WHEREAS counsel for the plaintiffs will be out of the country and therefore 8 not available from July 27, 2015 to August 10, 2015; 9 WHEREAS in the interest of judicial economy and efficiency, 10 NOW THEREFORE the parties stipulate as follows: 11 1. The hearing on the City’s motion to stay proceeding set for August 6, 12 2015 shall be continued to September 3, 2015 at 11:00 a.m., responses shall be due 13 on August 13, 2015; and replies shall be due on August 20, 2015. 14 15 16 17 18 19 2. Pending the motion to stay, the parties request that the initial case management conference be continued from August 11, 2015 to September 22, 2015. The parties agree to stay discovery and all other activities in this matter pending the resolution of the motion to stay. SO STIPULATED. Dated: July 8, 2015 NT Law /s/Julie Nong 20 21 22 By: JULIE N. NONG Attorneys for Plaintiffs 23 24 25 26 27 2 28 STIPULATION 1 Dated: July 8, 2015 DENNIS J. HERRERA City Attorney CHERYL ADAMS Chief Trial Deputy MARGARET W. BAUMGARTNER Deputy City Attorney 2 3 4 /s/ Margaret Baumgartner 5 By:_______________________ MARGARET W. BAUMGARTNER Attorneys for Defendant CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 6 7 8 9 ORDER ON STIPULATION 10 11 12 13 Based on the foregoing Stipulation by and between Plaintiffs and Defendant, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The hearing on the City’s motion to stay proceeding set for August 6, 14 2015 shall be continued to September 17, 2015 at 11:00 a.m., in Courtroom 4, 3 rd Fl., September 3, 2015 15 Oakland; responses shall be due on August 13, 2015; and replies shall be due on 16 August 20, 2015. 17 2. The initial case management conference shall be continued from rd October 20, 2015 18 August 11, 2015 to September 22, 2015 at 1:30 p.m., in Courtroom 4, 3 Fl., 19 Oakland. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 Dated: July 8, 2015 07/17/15 _____________________________ Kandis A. Westmore United States Magistrate Judge 23 United States District Court Judge 24 25 26 27 3 28 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?