Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

PINEIDA v. LEE, 3:12-CV-01171-JST. (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150605967 Visitors: 13
Filed: Jun. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 2015
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING SETTLEMENT JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . Plaintiff Gabriel Pineida and Defendants Lee, Rodriguez, Sepulveda, Wall, Grounds, Adams, Marshall, Bright, and Millner (collectively, "Defendants"), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows and jointly request that the Court stay this lawsuit as set forth below: WHEREAS, the Scheduling Order in this matter set the close of fact discovery on June 5, 2015
More

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING CASE PENDING SETTLEMENT

Plaintiff Gabriel Pineida and Defendants Lee, Rodriguez, Sepulveda, Wall, Grounds, Adams, Marshall, Bright, and Millner (collectively, "Defendants"), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows and jointly request that the Court stay this lawsuit as set forth below:

WHEREAS, the Scheduling Order in this matter set the close of fact discovery on June 5, 2015 (Dkt. No. 158);

WHEREAS, on May 18, 2015, the Parties engaged in a settlement conference before Judge Vadas (Dkt. No. 180);

WHEREAS, the Parties reached an agreement at the May 18 conference for the full settlement of this litigation;

WHEREAS, the Parties are now finalizing a written agreement memorializing their settlement; and

WHEREAS, Magistrate Judge Vadas has set a status conference regarding the finalization of the settlement for July 14, 2015;

THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE and jointly request, subject to the Court's approval, that the Court vacate the current case deadlines pending finalization of the settlement agreement, including the June 5, 2015 close of fact discovery, but excluding the July 14, 2015 status conference.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

ATTORNEY ATTESTATION

I, Todd R. Gregorian, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from any signatories indicated by a "conformed" signature (/s/) within this e-filed document. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.

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