Filed: Jan. 29, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 29, 2015
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. This matter was set for trial on August 26, 2014. However, due to a conflict with the Court's calendar, the Court vacated this date on April 4, 2014, and delayed rescheduling the trial on this matter pending determination on Defendants' summary judgment motion. ( See Minute Order, ECF No. 61.) On January 15, 2015, this Court filed its order denying Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication. ( See Order, ECF No. 64
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. This matter was set for trial on August 26, 2014. However, due to a conflict with the Court's calendar, the Court vacated this date on April 4, 2014, and delayed rescheduling the trial on this matter pending determination on Defendants' summary judgment motion. ( See Minute Order, ECF No. 61.) On January 15, 2015, this Court filed its order denying Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication. ( See Order, ECF No. 64...
More
ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
This matter was set for trial on August 26, 2014. However, due to a conflict with the Court's calendar, the Court vacated this date on April 4, 2014, and delayed rescheduling the trial on this matter pending determination on Defendants' summary judgment motion. (See Minute Order, ECF No. 61.) On January 15, 2015, this Court filed its order denying Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication. (See Order, ECF No. 64.) Thus, this matter must be reset for trial. However, the Court's docket cannot accommodate a trial until summer 2016.
Therefore, the Court hereby orders the parties to meet and confer as to whether both parties are willing to attend a settlement conference before the magistrate judge and whether the parties are amenable to consenting to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge in order to have their trial concluded in a more timely matter. The parties are hereby ordered to file a joint statement with this Court within thirty (30) days of the entry of this order notifying the Court as to whether a settlement conference would be beneficial and whether they would like to consent to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
