Mendoza v. County of Santa Clara et al

Filing 11

ORDER REFERRING CASE TO ENE AND MEDIATION. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on February 20, 2013. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/20/2013)

*E-FILED: 2/20/13*

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MARIA MENDOZA
CASE NO. 5-12-cv-06225-HRL
Plaintiff(s),
v.
COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA ETAL.
Defendant(s).

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

----------------------~/
Counsel repmt 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)

D
IZJ
IZJ

(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 ofADR must participate in an
ADR phone conference and may not file this form. They must instead file a Notice ofNeedfor
ADR Phone Conference. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5)

,l!l;ivate Process:
Private ADR (please identifY process and provider) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___

U

The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
the presumptive deadline (Fhe deadline is 90 days from the date of the order
referring the case to an ADR process unless othenvise ordered.)

D

IZJ

other requested deadline _J'-'u-:no:::e_,2"'8'-'2::.:0:..:1..::3_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--t----

' {~~tJ;:."'
- - Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: 2/15113

Is/ Valerie Ly
Attorney for Defendant

CONTINUE TO FOLLOWING PAGE

[PROPOSED] ORDER

X
D
D

Dated:

The parties' stipulation is adopted and IT IS SO ORDERED.
The parties' stipulation is modified as follows, and IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 20, 2013
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATEJUDGE

When filing this document in ECF, please be sure to use the appropriate Docket
Event, e.g., "Stipulation and Proposed Order Selecting Mediation."

Rev. 12111

Page 2 of2