Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Acosta v. Apex Building Material Supply, Inc., 1:16-cv-00779-DAD-EPG. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160927878 Visitors: 6
Filed: Aug. 18, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND DEADLINE FOR ALL DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . WHEREAS, the responsive pleading of Defendants APEX BUILDING MATERIAL SUPPLY, INC., EMMONS SEBENIUS and JANET K. SEBENIUS ("Defendants"), is currently due on August 15, 2016 as the result of Defendants accepting written Waiver of Service of the Summons; WHEREAS, the Mandatory Scheduling Conference in this matter
More

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND DEADLINE FOR ALL DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER

WHEREAS, the responsive pleading of Defendants APEX BUILDING MATERIAL SUPPLY, INC., EMMONS SEBENIUS and JANET K. SEBENIUS ("Defendants"), is currently due on August 15, 2016 as the result of Defendants accepting written Waiver of Service of the Summons;

WHEREAS, the Mandatory Scheduling Conference in this matter is currently set for September 6, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff JOSE ACOSTA ("Plaintiff," and together with Defendants, "the Parties") and Defendants wish additional time to attempt resolution of the matter without incurring fees and costs associated with filing responsive pleadings, preparing for and attending the scheduling conference as currently scheduled;

WHEREAS, the parties wish to conserve the Court's resources and time and not unnecessarily burden the Court with a matter that will likely be informally resolved;

WHEREAS, an inspection of the subject property by a certified California access specialist has taken place and Defendants are in the process of developing a plan for remediation of the access issues identified in that report but, due to various limitations, the remediation plan may require substantial input from consultants as well as creative resolutions, all of which will take some time to explore;

WHEREAS, the parties are cautiously optimistic that once the remediation plan is complete, an informal resolution of Plaintiff's claims will be reached, and thus further use of the Court's resources and time will be unnecessary;

NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff JOSE ACOSTA, through his attorney of record, and Defendants APEX BUILDING MATERIAL SUPPLY, INC., EMMONS SEBENIUS and JANET K. SEBENIUS, through their attorney of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. That Defendants, APEX BUILDING MATERIAL SUPPLY, INC., EMMONS SEBENIUS and JANET K. SEBENIUS'S time to respond to the Complaint be extended to October 14, 2016 which extension exceeds 28 days from the initial deadline; and

2. That the Mandatory Scheduling Conference that was scheduled by the Court for September 6, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. be continued to a date after November 14, 2016 at the Court's convenience.

Dated: August 17, 2016 COLEMAN & HOROWITT, LLP By: /s/Keith M. White KEITH M. WHITE Attorneys for Defendants, APEX BUILDING MATERIAL SUPPLY, INC., EMMONS SEBENIUS and JANET K. SEBENIUS Dated: August 17, 2016 MOORE LAW FIRM, P.C. By: /s/ Tanya E. Moore TANYA E. MOORE Attorney for Plaintiff JOSE ACOSTA

I attest that I obtained the concurrence of the person(s) whose electronic signature is shown prior to the filing of this document.

Dated: August 17, 2016 COLEMAN & HOROWITT, LLP By: /s/ Keith M. White KEITH M. WHITE Attorneys for Defendant, APEX BUILDING MATERIAL SUPPLY, INC., EMMONS SEBENIUS and JANET K. SEBENIUS

ORDER

The Parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants, APEX BUILDING MATERIAL SUPPLY, INC., EMMONS SEBENIUS and JANET K. SEBENIUS'S deadline to respond to Plaintiff's complaint is extended to October 14, 2016;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set for September 6, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. is continued to 11/28/16 at 9:30 in Courtroom 10 before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean. The parties are directed to file their joint scheduling report no later than seven (7) days prior to the Scheduling Conference.

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