Amundsen v. Comcast Corporation et al
Filing
16
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 11 Stipulation Selecting Mediation. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/27/2017)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Douglas Amundsen
CASE No C 17-CV-01302-HSG
Plaintiffs)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
V.
Comcast Corporation, et al.
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:
0 Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
Note: Magistrate judges do not conduct
mediations under ADRL.R. 6. To request an
Sl Mediation (ADRL.R. 6)
early settlement conference with a Magistrate
Judge, you must file a Notice of Need for
0 Private ADR (specify process and provider)
ADR Phone Conference. Do not use this
form. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 andADR
L.R. 3-5.
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
D the presumptive deadline (90 days from the date of the order referring the case to ADR,
unless otherwise ordered.)
S] other requested deadline: 10/6/17
Date: 5/23/17
David C. King
Attorney for Plaintiff
Date: 5/23/17
Brian H. Chun
Attorney for Defendant
a IT IS so ORDERED
X
D IT IS so ORDERED WITH MODIFICATIONS:
Date:
6/27/2017
u.s.
DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE
lniporKml! E-flle 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. 1-2017
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a copy of this document was served electronically on May 23, 2017, on counsel of
record in compliance with Federal Rule 5, Local Rule 5.6 and General Order 45, by use of the Court's ECF
system.
/s/ Denise Taylor
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?