Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

SLEDGE v. WARNER MUSIC GROUP CORP., 12-CV-0559-RS. (2013)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20130419914 Visitors: 15
Filed: Apr. 18, 2013
Latest Update: Apr. 18, 2013
Summary: JOINT STATEMENT/STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge. Plaintiffs in the above captioned consolidated action and Defendant Warner Music Group Corp. ("WMG") together submit this joint statement/stipulation. On August 31, 2012, this Court granted a stay of the proceedings to allow the parties to participate in settlement discussions and set a further status conference on March 14, 2013. Over the course of those six months, the parties diligently parti
More

JOINT STATEMENT/STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER

RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.

Plaintiffs in the above captioned consolidated action and Defendant Warner Music Group Corp. ("WMG") together submit this joint statement/stipulation.

On August 31, 2012, this Court granted a stay of the proceedings to allow the parties to participate in settlement discussions and set a further status conference on March 14, 2013. Over the course of those six months, the parties diligently participated in settlement negotiations. They exchanged information and analysis to facilitate the negotiations. They participated in two full day mediation sessions with the Honorable Daniel Weinstein (Ret.), and they held additional phone conferences with and without the mediator.

On February 28, 2013, pursuant to the Court's stay order, the parties made a joint filing with the Court reporting on the status of the negotiations and requesting that the case remained stayed because of the ongoing talks. The Court extended the stay, setting a Case Management Conference for May 2, 2013 and asking the parties to make a joint filing regarding the status of the negotiations on April 18, 2013. The Court's order, like the first, provided that if, at the time of the filing of the joint statement the parties agreed that further settlement discussions would be fruitful, they could seek additional time for further negotiations. Stay Order at 3.

The parties have continued to diligently pursue settlement negotiations over the last two months. In particular, the parties participated in an in-person settlement meeting on March 6, 2013. Thereafter, the parties continued their discussions by phone and email, which discussions are ongoing. While the parties have not reached a settlement at this juncture, the negotiations are constructive and progress has been made. All parties are committed to continuing the settlement discussions at this time.

For these reasons, the parties jointly file this statement/stipulation to inform the Court that they believe further settlement discussions would be fruitful and to seek additional time for continued negotiations. Specifically, the parties hereby agree and stipulate, subject to the approval of the Court, to the following:

1. A further Case Management Conference to be set in 60 days, subject to the schedule of the Court; and shall be scheduled for 6/27/13 at 10:00 a.m. 2. Fourteen days before the Case Management Conference—or before that date if Plaintiffs and/or WMG believe that settlement cannot be reached—the parties shall file a joint statement/stipulation with the Court alerting the Court to the fact that settlement could not be reached and resetting a schedule for WMG's response to the Amended Complaint (which deadline for WMG's response shall be no sooner than 30 days from the date of the joint statement) and subsequent dates and deadlines. In the alternative, if the parties agree that further settlement discussions would be fruitful, the parties can instead file a joint statement/stipulation seeking additional time for further settlement negotiations.

Filer's Attestation

I, Tamerlin J. Godley, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file this JOINT STATEMENT/STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER. I hereby attest that the counsel listed above concur in this filing.

PURSUANT TO THIS STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


* A complete list of the attorneys for Plaintiffs is attached to the Amended Complaint.
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