Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

JULIEN v. SPMG, INC., 3:15-cv-00565-JST. (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150514d47 Visitors: 17
Filed: May 12, 2015
Latest Update: May 12, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MAY 27, 2015 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE JON TIGAR , District Judge . Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2, David Julien ("Julien") and Defendants SPMG, Inc. and abeo Management Corporation (collectively "abeo" or "Defendants") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate to continue the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for May 27, 2015 to 30 days after this Court's ruling on
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE MAY 27, 2015 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2, David Julien ("Julien") and Defendants SPMG, Inc. and abeo Management Corporation (collectively "abeo" or "Defendants") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate to continue the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for May 27, 2015 to 30 days after this Court's ruling on Defendants' Motion to Transfer.

WHEREAS, in an Order dated February 13, 2015, the Court set a Case Management Conference for May 27, 2015 (Dkt. No. 16);

WHEREAS, on February 26, 2015, Julien filed a First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 17);

WHEREAS, on March 12, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion to Transfer Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint to the District of Utah (Dkt. No. 20);

WHEREAS, Julien responded to Defendant's Motion on March 26, 2015, concurring that transfer to the District of Utah is proper (Dkt. No. 21), and Defendants filed a timely reply (Dkt. No. 23);

WHEREAS, the Parties believe that the Case Management Conference will be more productive if it is deferred until after the Court has ruled on Defendants' Motion;

WHEREAS, in the event this Court denies Defendants' Motion and retains this matter, the Parties agree to continue the Case Management Conference to 30 days after this Court rules on Defendants' Motion;

WHEREAS, no prior continuance has been requested in this case;

WHEREAS, continuing the May 27, 2015 Case Management Conference to 30 days after this Court's ruling on Defendants' Motion will not affect the schedule for the remaining case or prejudice the Parties.

THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED by the Parties and respectfully requested that the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for May 27, 2015 be continued to 30 days after this Court's ruling on Defendants' Motion to Transfer (Dkt. No. 20). Pursuant to Local Rules and this Court's Standing Orders, the Parties will submit a joint case management conference statement 10 (ten) court days prior to the newly-scheduled conference.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

FILER'S ATTESTATION

I, Sacha M. Steenhoek, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue May 27, 2015 Case Management Conference. In compliance with L.R. 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Jonathan McNeil Wong concurs in this filing.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the Parties' Stipulation to Continue May 27, 2015 Case Management Conference and for good cause appearing, the Stipulation is approved. The Court hereby orders as follows:

The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for May 27, 2015 at 2:00 p.m. is continued until 30 days after this Court's ruling on Defendants' Motion to Transfer. July 1, 2015, at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

IT IS SO ORDERED AS MODIFIED.

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