Johnson-v-CFS II, Inc
Filing
24
Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh granting 20 Stipulation selecting Mediation.(lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2012)
Case5:12-cv-01091-LHK Document20 Filed07/17/12 Page1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BRUCE ALBERT JOHNSON,
Case No. 5:12-CV-01091-LHK-PSG
Plaintiff,
v.
CFS II, INC., an Oklahoma corporation,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SELECTING ADR PROCESS
Defendant.
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:
Court Processes:
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 that 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 Process:
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.)
other requested deadline
Dated: July 16, 2012
/s/ Fred W. Schwinn
Attorney for Plaintiff
Dated: July 16, 2012
/s/ Robert C. Chandler
Attorney for Defendant
Case5:12-cv-01091-LHK Document20 Filed07/17/12 Page2 of 2
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Pursuant to the Stipulation above, the captioned matter is hereby referred to:
Non-binding Arbitration
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE)
Mediation
Private ADR
Deadline for ADR session
90 days from the date of this order.
other
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
July 19, 2012
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?