Palma et al v. Williams Tank Lines

Filing 7

STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND RELATED DEADLINES; ORDER re 6 Stipulation, filed by Edsel Palma, Jose Pena, Steven Wrachford, Tomas Toral, Williams Tank Lines. 12/13/2011 Case Management Conference continued to 2/14/2012 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 5, 4th Floor, San Jose. Case Management Statement due by 2/7/2012. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on 12/7/2011. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/7/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

MORRIS NAZARIAN, Cal Bar. No. 230275
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF MORRIS NAZARIAN
1875 Century Park E., Suite 1345
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs EDSEL PALMA
STEVEN WRACHFORD, TOMAS TORAL, and
JOSE PENA
JACKSON LEWIS LLP
CARY G. PALMER, Cal. Bar No. 186601
[e-mail]
RANDALL J. HAKES, Cal. Bar No. 233548
[e-mail]
801 K Street, Suite 2300
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
WILLIAMS TANK LINES

13
14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN JOSE DIVISION

17
18

EDSEL PALMA, AN INDIVIDUAL; STEVEN
WRACHFORD, AN INDIVIDUAL; TOMAS
TORAL, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND JOSE
PENA, AN INDIVIDUAL,

19
Plaintiffs,

Case No. 5:11-cv-05257-PSG
STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND RELATED DEADLINES;
[PROPOSED] ORDER

20
v.
21
22
23

WILLIAMS TANK LINES, A CALIFORNIA
CORPORATION,
Defendant.

Complaint Filed:
Trial Date:

October 28, 2011
None Set

24
25

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-12 and 16-2, plaintiffs Edsel Palma, Steven

26

Wrachford, Tomas Toral, and Jose Pena (collectively “Plaintiffs”) and defendant Williams Tank

27

Lines (“Defendant”), specially appearing, hereby respectfully request that the Initial Case

28

Management Conference scheduled for December 13, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. and all deadlines related
1
Stipulated Request to Continue Case Management Conference
and Related Deadlines; [Proposed] Order

Palma, et al. v. Williams Tank Lines, et al.
USDC NDC Case No. 5:11-cv-05257- PSG

1

to that conference be continued for sixty (60) days to allow the Plaintiffs time to complete their

2

substitution of counsel and to then allow the Parties time to complete their obligations related to

3

meeting and conferring per Rule 26(f), filing a case management conference statement and

4

preparing for initial disclosures. Furthermore, pursuant to Local Rule 16-2(a), the Initial Case

5

Management Conference should not be set for at least 90 days after the filing of the complaint. In

6

this case, the Initial Case Management Conference was erroneously set for just 46 days after the

7

filing of the Complaint—denying the Parties of the opportunity to adequately prepare for the

8

Initial Case Management Conference.

9

On October 28, 2011, Plaintiff’s filed their complaint, by and through their counsel

10

of record, Michael L. Tracy. Plaintiff’s served Defendant on November 1, 2011, and Defendant’s

11

responsive pleading was originally due on November 23, 2011. Shortly before the Answer

12

became due, Plaintiffs sought to obtain new counsel—Morris Nazarian. To allow Plaintiffs time

13

to sort out representation and issues related to their Complaint, the Parties stipulated that

14

Defendants would have until December 8, 2011 to file a responsive pleading—a 15-day

15

extension. Because the Plaintiffs continue to seek a substitution of counsel, the Parties are

16

unprepared for the upcoming Case Management Conference statement.

17

anticipate being able to meaningfully participate at the present case management conference on

18

December 13, 2011.

The Parties do not

19

The Parties have not requested a prior continuance of the Case Management

20

Conference and related deadlines. The Parties expect that the requested extension of the date for

21

the Initial Case Management Conference will have no adverse effect on the schedule for the case.

22

No trial date or other deadlines have yet been set. The continuance of the Case Management

23

Conference would promote judicial efficiency as the Parties will likely be able to more

24

meaningfully participate in the case management conference after Plaintiffs’ complete their

25

substitution of counsel and the parties are then able to address the preparations and obligations

26

associated with preparing for the Initial Case Management Conference and all deadlines

27

associated therewith.

28

///
2
Stipulated Request to Continue Case Management Conference
and Related Deadlines; [Proposed] Order

Palma, et al. v. Williams Tank Lines, et al.
USDC NDC Case No. 5:11-cv-05257- PSG

1

Date: December 6, 2011

LAW OFFICES OF MORRIS NAZARIAN

2
By: /s/ [Morris Nazarian] as approved on 12/6/11
MORRIS NAZARIAN

3
4

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
EDSEL PALMA, STEVEN WRACHFORD, TOMAS
TORAL, and JOSE PENA

5
6
7

Date: December 6, 2011

JACKSON LEWIS LLP

8
By: /s/ [Randall J. Hakes]
CARY G. PALMER
RANDALL J. HAKES

9
10

Attorneys for Defendant
WILLIAMS TANK LINES

11
12
13

[PROPOSED] ORDER

14

Based upon the foregoing Stipulated Request to Continue Case Management

15

Conference and Related Deadlines, the Court orders the continuance of the Initial Case

16

February 14
Management Conference to ______________________________, 2012. All deadlines related to

17

the Initial Case Management Conference are continued based on the new date for the Initial Case

18

Management Conference.

19

Dated: December , 2011

20
_________________________________________
HONORABLE PAUL S. GREWAL
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27

4821-0092-6734, v. 1

28
3
Stipulated Request to Continue Case Management Conference
and Related Deadlines; [Proposed] Order

Palma, et al. v. Williams Tank Lines, et al.
USDC NDC Case No. 5:11-cv-05257- PSG