Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

HAN v. SYNERGY HOMECARE FRANCHISING, LLC, 4:16-cv-03759-KAW. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160922997 Visitors: 19
Filed: Sep. 21, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 21, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO CONTINUE THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE KANDIS A. WESTMORE , Magistrate Judge . WHEREAS on July 5, 2016, defendant SYNERGY HomeCare Franchising, LLC ("Defendant") filed a Notice of Removal removing this action from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda; WHEREAS on July 6, 2016, the Court entered an Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR deadlines setting the Case Management Conference ("CMC") in
More

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO CONTINUE THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

WHEREAS on July 5, 2016, defendant SYNERGY HomeCare Franchising, LLC ("Defendant") filed a Notice of Removal removing this action from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda;

WHEREAS on July 6, 2016, the Court entered an Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR deadlines setting the Case Management Conference ("CMC") in this action for October 4, 2016 at 1:30 p.m.;

WHEREAS on July 12, 2016, defendant SYNERGY HomeCare Franchising, LLC ("Defendant") filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, which was originally noticed for hearing on August 18, 2016;

WHEREAS on. August 17, 2016, plaintiffs John Han, Alice Lai-Bitker, and Veris Eastbay Homecare, Inc. (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a Motion to Remand this action to state court, which is currently scheduled to be heard on October 6, 2016;

WHEREAS on August 17, 2016, the Court entered an Order Continuing Hearing on Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and Compel Arbitration, which continued the hearing on the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint to November 3, 2016;

WHEREAS on September 13, 2016, the parties filed a Stipulation and (Proposed) Order Selecting ADR Process whereby the parties agreed to engage in court-sponsored mediation;

WHEREAS counsel for the parties have met and conferred and have agreed that economy and efficiency support continuing the CMC until after the Court rules on any pending motions;

WHEREAS counsel for the parties have agreed that economy and efficiency also support continuing the CMC until the parties have engaged in the courtsponsored mediation;

IT IS STIPULATED that (1) the parties' deadline to file their Rule 26(f) Report and Joint Case Management Conference Statement be continued to December 13, 2016 and (2) the CMC be continued to December 20, 2016, at 1:30 p.m.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer