Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Brightbill v. General Motors, LLC, 3:15-cv-03789-MMC. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160331d06 Visitors: 3
Filed: Mar. 30, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 30, 2016
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiffs Joel Brightbill and Patricia Payeur and Defendant General Motors LLC (collectively referred to as "the Parties"), by and through their attorneys of record, as follows: 1. The Parties have exchanged Rule 26 initial disclosures and participated in a full day of mediation on March 28, 2016 in San Jose with mediator Charles H
More

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiffs Joel Brightbill and Patricia Payeur and Defendant General Motors LLC (collectively referred to as "the Parties"), by and through their attorneys of record, as follows:

1. The Parties have exchanged Rule 26 initial disclosures and participated in a full day of mediation on March 28, 2016 in San Jose with mediator Charles Hawkins. Substantial progress was made at the mediation but a settlement was not reached. The Parties agreed at the conclusion of the mediation to continue settlement discussions for the next 30 days.

2. The parties believe there is a reasonable likelihood of resolving this case through continued settlement discussions. Good cause therefore exists to continue the Case Management Conference (CMC), currently set for April 15, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. to avoid the time and expense associated with preparing the CMC report and appearing at the conference.

3. Accordingly, the parties stipulate and request that the court continue the CMC to May 13, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. If the case has not settled, the Parties will file a CMC Statement at least one week prior to the continued CMC date. If the case settles between now and then, the parties will notify the Court that the CMC can be taken off calendar.

4. The Parties also agree that, should any of the above-referenced proposed dates be inconvenient or unacceptable for any reason, the Court has the discretion to set other dates which are more convenient or acceptable. However, counsel request that, in any event, the current proposed dates in this matter be continued to a time that is at least after May 13, 2016. I hereby attest that I have on file all holographic signatures corresponding to any signatures indicated by a conformed signature (/S/) within this e-filed document.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, 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