Napolitano v. U.S. Roche Health and Welfare Benefits Veba Plan
STIPULATION AND ORDER Referring Case to Private ADR. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong on 01/04/2016. (tmiS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2016)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
US ROCHE HEALTH AND
WELFARE BENEFIT PLN ,
CASE NO. ______________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the
following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5:
The parties agree to participate in the following ADR process:
Non-binding Arbitration (ADR L.R. 4)
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
(Note: Parties who believe that an early settlement conference with a Magistrate Judge is
appreciably more likely to meet their needs than any other form of ADR must participate in an
ADR phone conference and may not file this form. They must instead file a Notice of Need for
ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5)
Private ADR (please identify process and provider) ______________________
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
the presumptive deadline (The deadline is 90 days from the date of the order
referring the case to an ADR process unless otherwise ordered. )
May 31, 2016
other requested deadline _____________________________________________
/s/ Emily Bolt
Attorney for Plaintiff
/s/ Joseph Liburt
Attorney for Defendant
CONTINUE TO FOLLOWING PAGE
The parties’ stipulation is adopted and IT IS SO ORDERED.
The parties’ stipulation is modified as follows, and IT IS SO ORDERED.
This case is referred to PRIVATE ADR.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
When filing this document in ECF, please be sure to use the appropriate Docket
Event, e.g., “Stipulation and Proposed Order Selecting Mediation.”
Page 2 of 2
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?