Mark A. Cavender et al v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A.
Filing
24
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 23 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Mediation by Wells Fargo Bank N.A. filed by Pamela J Cavender, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., Mark A Cavender, Case referred to mediation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 7/19/16. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2016)
λ-»¬ Ú±®³
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Ó¿®µ ú п³»´¿ Ý¿ª»²¼»®
,
Case No. C ïêóððéðçíóÕßÉ
Plaintiff(s)
v.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
É»´´- Ú¿®¹± Þ¿²µô Òß
,
Defendant(s)
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:
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
²
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
Private ADR (specify process and provider)
N ot Magistrate judges do not conduct
e:
mediations under ADR L.R. 6. To request an
early settlement conference with a Magistrate
Judge, you must file a Notice of Need for
ADR Phone Conference. Do not use this
form. See Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5.
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
the presumptive deadline (90 days from the date of the order referring the case to ADR,
unless otherwise ordered.)
²
other requested deadline: ïî𠼿§- ¿º¬»® ½´±-» ±º °´»¿¼·²¹-
Date: Ö«´§ ïîô îðïê
Date: Ö«´§ ïîô îðïê
Signed: ñ-ñ Ò·½±´» ݸ»®±²»Attorney for Plaintiff
Signed: ñ-ñ Û´·¦¿¾»¬¸ ر´¬ ß²¼®»©Attorney for Defendant
Ю·²¬ Ú±®³
x
IT IS SO ORDERED
IT IS SO ORDERED WITH MODIFICATIONS:
U.S. DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Important! E-file this form in ECF using the appropriate event among these choices:
“Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting Mediation” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting ENE” or
“Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting Private ADR.”
Form ADR-Stip rev. 6-2016
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?