Filed: Mar. 10, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 10, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MEDIATION COMPLETION DATE MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b) and 6-2, Plaintiff Michael del Aguila and Defendants Genentech-Roche Pharma Transitional Benefits Plan (erroneously sued as Genentech-Roche Transitional Benefit Plan); Genentech, Inc.; and Plan Administrator of the Genentech-Roche Pharma Transitional Benefits Plan (erroneously sued as Genentech Plan Administrator and Genentech Plan Fiduciary)
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MEDIATION COMPLETION DATE MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b) and 6-2, Plaintiff Michael del Aguila and Defendants Genentech-Roche Pharma Transitional Benefits Plan (erroneously sued as Genentech-Roche Transitional Benefit Plan); Genentech, Inc.; and Plan Administrator of the Genentech-Roche Pharma Transitional Benefits Plan (erroneously sued as Genentech Plan Administrator and Genentech Plan Fiduciary) ..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MEDIATION COMPLETION DATE
MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge.
Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b) and 6-2, Plaintiff Michael del Aguila and Defendants Genentech-Roche Pharma Transitional Benefits Plan (erroneously sued as Genentech-Roche Transitional Benefit Plan); Genentech, Inc.; and Plan Administrator of the Genentech-Roche Pharma Transitional Benefits Plan (erroneously sued as Genentech Plan Administrator and Genentech Plan Fiduciary) (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate to continue the mediation completion date.
WHEREAS, at the Initial Case Management Conference held on January 30, 2015, the Court ordered that the Parties complete court-sponsored mediation within 90 days (April 30, 2015) (Dkt. No. 27);
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2015, the Parties discussed settlement considerations and determined that they need some discovery and resolution of a motion in order to potentially bridge substantially differing views on the merits of the case;
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that an additional 60 days to complete mediation, to June 29, 2015, may benefit the settlement process by allowing such discovery and motion work to inform the Parties' respective views of the case;
WHEREAS, the Parties have requested one continuance in this matter previously to continue the Initial Case Management Conference (Dkt. No. 22), which the Court granted (Dkt. No. 23);
WHEREAS, the Parties do not request an extension of any other date set in this matter, therefore a continuance will not affect the remaining schedule case or prejudice the Parties.
THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED by the Parties and respectfully requested that the mediation completion date currently set for April 30, 2015 be continued 60 days to June 29, 2015.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Pursuant to the Parties' Stipulation to Continue the Mediation Completion Date and for good cause appearing, the Stipulation is approved. The Court orders as follows: The mediation completion date currently set for April 30, 2015 is continued 60 days to June 29, 2015.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
