STIPULATION AND JOINT REQUEST OF THE PARTIES TO RESET THE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

BARBARA A. McAULIFFE, Magistrate Judge.

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

By and through their counsel of record in this action, plaintiffs CHANNEL CENTENO, HERIBERTA CENTENO, AND JOSE CENTENO ("Plaintiffs") and defendants CITY OF FRESNO ("City") AND OFFICERS ZEBULON PRICE AND FELIPE MIGUEL LUCERO (collectively herein after as "Defendants") — the parties hereby stipulate for the purpose of jointly requesting that the honorable Court modify, reset, and continue specific operative case management dates and deadlines, specifically the mediation date, in this action along the following lines.

GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT.

1. On July 21, 2016, somewhat consistent with the schedule proposed by the parties in their Joint Report per Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) [Dkt. Doc. 15], the Court set a mandatory settlement conference before the Magistrate Judge for March 29, 2017 before the honorable Judge Stanley A. Boone.

2. However, both the lead counsel (Ms. Mildred K. O'Linn) and the co-lead counsel (Mr. Tony M. Sain) for defendants in the instant action were engaged in a Trial on another matter (Cardenas v. City ofManhattan Beach, U.S. Dist. Ct., C.D. Cal. case no. 2:15-CV-01469-PJW) that ran longer than anticipated. Specifically, the Cardenas trial did not go to the jury until March 28, 2017, and the jury was still in deliberation on March 29, 2017. Although the Cardenas jury rendered a defense verdict on March 29, 2017, the timing of their deliberations made compliance with the Court-set mandatory scheduling conference impossible. Plaintiffs lack sufficient information or personal knowledge to stipulate to the contentions of this paragraph; but plaintiffs do stipulate that a Trial calendar conflict constitutes good cause for a continuance of a mandatory settlement conference.

3. Due to the unexpected nature of the Cardenas Trial overrun, and due to a miscommunication, it was not made clear to the Court until an email dated March 23, 2017 that defense counsel could no longer comply with the Court-set mediation. Plaintiffs lack sufficient information or personal knowledge to stipulate to the contentions of this paragraph; but plaintiffs do stipulate that a Trial calendar conflict constitutes good cause for a continuance of a mandatory settlement conference.

4. After a conference among counsel for all of the parties, and with the staff of the honorable Court, the parties and the Court have determined that an alternative settlement conference date of June 8, 2017 (before the Hon. Barbara A. McAuliffe) is mutually agreeable to all.

5. This Stipulation is the third request for any continuance in this action: the parties have not yet sought any continuance of trial date in this action.

6. Accordingly, in light of the foregoing, and in order to facilitate the interests of all parties to this action, by and through their counsel of record in this action, the parties hereby Stipulate that Good Cause exists — and the parties respectfully request that the Court modify the operative case management scheduling order —to continue the case management dates and deadlines in this action, as follows herein below.

STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE AND MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER(S).

7. Accordingly, in light of the foregoing, the parties respectfully request that, as to the following case management deadlines, the Court issue an ORDER vacating the current deadlines and modifying the case management schedule as follows:336322340312341341298336316336317298379298302374303341340293341336322340

8. Except as specified herein above, nothing in the parties' Stipulation or any associated Order shall modify, vacate, or rescind the Court's operative Scheduling Orders [e.g., Dkt. Doc. 17, 34, 38, 39].

9. This Stipulation may be signed in counterpart and a facsimile or electronic signature shall be as valid as an original signature.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

[PROSPOSED] ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE OF THE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, and pursuant to the Court's inherent and statutory authority, including but not limited to the Court's authority under the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the United States District Court, Eastern District of California Local Rules; after due consideration of all of the relevant pleadings, papers, and records in this action; and upon such other evidence or argument as was presented to the Court; Good Cause appearing therefor, and in furtherance of the interests of justice,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Court hereby Orders that the Court's scheduling orders [Mt. Doc. 17, 34] are hereby further modified, continued, and reset to the following case management schedule:

2. Except as specified herein above, all other dates and deadlines operative as of the Court's scheduling Orders [e.g., Dkt. Doc. 17, 34, 38, 39] would remain unchanged and unaffected by the parties' Stipulation or any associated Order made pursuant thereto. The provisions of the parties' Stipulation and this Order shall be in effect until further applicable Order of the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED THAT the Settlement Conference is continued from March 29, 2017 to June 8, 2017 at 9:30AM before Judge McAuliffe.

IT IS SO ORDERED.