Opinion
WILLIAM H. LEIFER,, GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER, Fresno, CA, Attorneys for Defendant Mahmood Modirzadeh as Trustee of the Namaki Living Trust U/D/T dated June 27, 2002.
MOORE LAW FIRM, Tanya E. Moore, Attorneys for Plaintiff Jose Escobedo.
THIRD STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, Jose Escobedo ("Plaintiff"), through his attorney, Defendant Mahmood Modirzadeh, Trustee of the Namaki Living Trust U/D/T dated June 27, 2002 ("Modirzadeh"), through his attorney, and Defendants Salgado's Family Group dba Lety's Mexican Restaurant ("Salgado"), Michael Eng dba J&J Wireless ("Eng"), and Johny Sryavong dba J&J Wireless ("Sryavong, " and together with Modirzadeh, Salgado and Eng, collectively "Defendants"), who are presently not represented and specially appearing pro se for purposes of obtaining this additional extension and continuance, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. This action arises out of Plaintiff's claims that he is disabled, and that the property owned and/or operated by Defendants was and is not fully accessible to him in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189, and parallel California law. Plaintiff seeks an injunction requiring Defendants to make the property fully accessible to him, as well as damages.
2. Defendants' responses to the complaint were initially due August 17, 2015, which deadline was extended by stipulation to September 14, 2015 (Dkt. 9). A second extension was granted to October 30, 2015.
3. The purpose of the initial extension was to permit Defendants time to obtain an inspection of the property by a California Certified Access Specialist ("CASp") and subsequent report, to determine what, if any, barriers to access exist at the subject property and which report could form the basis of a resolution of Plaintiff's equitable claims.
4. Defendants represent that substantially all of Plaintiff's requested modifications have been completed or are almost completed, but there has been a delay in having the CASp Specialist certify completion due to the Specialist having surgery. Defendants anticipate that such information should be obtained by November 10, 2015, which will then allow the parties to complete their settlement discussions.
5. A Scheduling Conference was previously set for October 13, 2015 which date was continued to December 1, 2015. This requested extension will not affect the hearing date.
6. The parties are optimistic that this matter will settle given Defendants' representation that most of the work has been performed, and that it will therefore not be necessary for responsive pleadings to be filed. As such, the parties wish to conserve both the fees expended as well as Court resources while they exhaust settlement efforts. At this time, the only impediment to full settlement is having the CASp Specialist certify the work is done and collecting the agreed on payments.
7. For these reasons, the parties stipulate to continue the deadline to file responsive pleadings to November 18, 2015.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
ORDER
The parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all Defendants shall have to and including November 18, 2015 within which to respond to Plaintiff's complaint. The Scheduling Conference shall remain the same.
IT IS SO ORDERED.