COLLECTIVE ACTION — 29 U.S.C. 216(b)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: SETTING DEADLINE TO SUBMIT SETTLEMENT TO COURT FOR APPROVAL, VACATING DATE FOR CITY TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND CMC

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., District Judge.

TO THE COURT AND ALL INTERESTED PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

WHEREAS, this putative collective action was filed on April 6, 2018, asserting the City of Petaluma, the named Defendant in this action, violated the overtime payment provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA");

WHEREAS, the City was served the Summons and Complaint on April 16, 2018;

WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulation and order, the City's response to the Complaint is presently due on or by February 21, 2019 (see Dkt. No. 33);

WHEREAS, the Parties have been engaged in substantive settlement discussions in an effort to resolve this action, including the City providing Plaintiffs with payroll records and other information pertinent to their claims, and attending an informal settlement conference on July 17, 2018;

WHEREAS, this Court issued an order referring this case to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley for settlement proceedings on October 22, 2018 (see Dkt. No. 29);

WHEREAS, the Parties attended a full-day of settlement negotiations on January 31, 2019 with the assistance of Judge Corley (see Dkt. No. 36);

WHEREAS, tentative settlement was reached at the January 31, 2019 settlement conference, but the Parties need additional time to finalize settlement terms, draft the settlement agreement, obtain approval from all Parties, and prepare briefing for this court in order to secure its approval of the settlement;

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the City's date to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint and the Case Management Conference scheduled for March 20, 2019 should be vacated; and

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that this Court should order the Parties to submit their settlement agreement for the Court's approval no later than May 1, 2019.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the Parties:

DECLARATION OF DAVID E. MASTAGNI

I, DAVID E. MASTAGNI, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice in the State of California and am specifically admitted to practice before the Northern District of California.

2. I am an attorney of record for Plaintiff in this action and make this declaration within my personal knowledge. If called upon to testify, I could and would testify competently with respect thereto.

3. Since June 2018, the Parties in this case have engaged in meaningful and concrete settlement discussions.

4. In furtherance of these settlement discussions, Defendant provided Plaintiffs with payroll records and other requested information pertinent to Plaintiffs' claims in the hopes of settling this matter without further litigation.

5. On July 17, 2018, the Parties met at Petaluma City Hall to discuss settlement of this case. The discussions were productive and the Parties continued to engage in meaningful and concrete settlement negotiations.

6. The Parties participated in a full-day settlement conference supervised by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on January 31, 2019. Prior to the settlement conference, the Parties submitted two rounds of briefing to Judge Corley.

7. Toward the end of the settlement conference, the Parties reached a tentative agreement on material terms of settlement of this matter. For this reason, the Parties seek to vacate the existing dates on calendar and ask the Court to set a deadline to submit the anticipated settlement agreement to the Court for approval.

8. Prior to this, the Parties stipulated to extend the Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from May 7, 2018 to July 6, 2018, again stipulated to extend the Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from July 6, 2018 to August 10, 2018, again stipulated to extend Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from August 10, 2018 to October 26, 2018, again stipulated to extend Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from October 26, 2018 to December 21, 2018, and again stipulated to extend Defendant's time to respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint from December 21, 2018 to February 21, 2018.

9. Our request if granted, will impact the currently scheduled Case Management Conference, and related deadlines, set by the Court. However, due to the tentative settlement reached, the Parties do not believe a further Case Management Conference is necessary.

10. I do not believe any party will be prejudiced by vacating the existing Court dates and setting a new deadline for submission of the Parties' anticipated settlement to the Court.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED THAT: