STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: EXTENDING PARTIES' TIME TO SUBMIT SETTLEMENT TO COURT FOR APPROVAL AND RESETTING CMC DATE

COLLECTIVE ACTION — 29 U.S.C. 216(b)

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., District Judge.

TO THE COURT AND ALL INTERESTED PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

WHEREAS, this putative collective action was filed on April 6, 2018, asserting the City of Petaluma, the named Defendant in this action, violated the overtime payment provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA");

WHEREAS, the City was served the Summons and Complaint on April 16, 2018;

WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulation and order, the City's deadline for the City to respond to the Complaint has been vacated (see Dkt. No. 38);

WHEREAS, the Parties have been engaged in substantive settlement discussions in an effort to resolve this action, including the City providing Plaintiffs with payroll records and other information pertinent to their claims, and attending an informal settlement conference on July 17, 2018;

WHEREAS, this Court issued an order referring this case to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley for settlement proceedings on October 22, 2018 (see Dkt. No. 29);

WHEREAS, the Parties attended a full-day of settlement negotiations on January 31, 2019 with the assistance of Judge Corley (see Dkt. No. 36);

WHEREAS, tentative settlement was reached at the January 31, 2019 settlement conference, but the Parties need additional time to finalize settlement terms, draft the settlement agreement, obtain approval from all Parties, and prepare briefing for this court in order to secure its approval of the settlement;

WHEREAS, the Parties have been negotiating the material terms of settlement and have entered into an agreement on or about April 11, 2019;

WHEREAS, individualized, per-Plaintiff back pay calculations were completed on May 21, 209;

WHEREAS, the Parties agree they need additional time to finalize the long-form settlement agreement, obtain signatures from all plaintiffs, and to draft their settlement-related submissions for the Court;

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the Parties' deadline to submit their settlement agreement to the Court should be extended to June 26, 2019; and

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the Case Management Conference currently set for June 11, 2019, should be reset for July 2, 2019 or a later date convenient for the Court.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the Parties:

DECLARATION OF DAVID E. MASTAGNI

I, DAVID E. MASTAGNI, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice in the State of California and am specifically admitted to practice before the Northern District of California.

2. I am an attorney of record for Plaintiff in this action and make this declaration within my personal knowledge. If called upon to testify, I could and would testify competently with respect thereto.

3. Since June 2018, the Parties in this case have begun meaningful and concrete settlement discussions.

4. In furtherance of settlement discussions, Defendant has provided Plaintiffs with payroll records and other requested information pertinent to Plaintiffs' claims in the hopes of settling this matter without further litigation.

5. On July 17, 2018, the Parties met at Petaluma City Hall to discuss settlement of this case. The discussions were productive and the Parties continue to engage in meaningful and concrete settlement negotiations.

6. The Parties participated in a full-day settlement conference supervised by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on January 31, 2019. Prior to the settlement conference, the Parties submitted two rounds of briefing to Judge Corley.

7. Toward the end of the settlement conference, the Parties reached a tentative agreement on material terms of settlement of this matter.

8. The Parties agreed on the material terms of settlement on or around April 11, 2019. The Parties now seek additional time to finalize a long-form settlement agreement, obtain necessary signatures, and draft and submit settlement-related papers to the Court. For this reason, the Parties seek to extend their deadline to submit their settlement agreement to the Court and reset the currently-scheduled case management conference.

9. Prior to this, the Parties stipulated to extend the Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from May 7, 2018 to July 6, 2018, again stipulated to extend the Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from July 6, 2018 to August 10, 2018, again stipulated to extend Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from August 10, 2018 to October 26, 2018, again stipulated to extend Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from October 26, 2018 to December 21, 2018, and again stipulated to extend Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from December 21, 2018 to February 21, 2018. After attending the January 31, 2019 settlement conference, the Parties stipulated to vacate Defendant's deadline to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint and to vacate the initial case management conference then-set for March 20, 2019, as well as stipulated that the Parties must submit their settlement agreement to this Court for approval no later than May 1, 2019. The Parties subsequently stipulated to extend the Parties' time to submit their settlement agreement to this Court for approval no later than June 5, 2019 and to reset the case management conference for June 11, 2019.

9. Our request if granted, will impact the currently scheduled Case Management Conference, and related deadlines, set by the Court.

10. I do not believe any party will be prejudiced by vacating the existing Court dates and setting a new deadline for submission of the Parties' anticipated settlement to the Court and related case management conference.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED THAT: