From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Albertsen v. 3M Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 29, 2011
Case No.: C 10-04610 SBA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)

Opinion

Case No.: C 10-04610 SBA

11-29-2011

LARA ALBERTSEN, Plaintiff, v. 3M COMPANY, Defendant.

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP Francis J. Ortman, III (State Bar No. 213202) Robb D. McFadden (State Bar No. 258569) SEYFARTH SHAW LLP Brandon R. McKelvey (State Bar No. 217002) Attorneys for Defendant 3M COMPANY PATTERSON LAW GROUP, APC Allison H. Goddard (State Bar No. 211098) James R. Patterson (State Bar No. 211102) JACZKO GODDARD LLP J. Christopher Jaczko (State Bar No. 149317) Attorneys for Plaintiff LARA ALBERTSEN


SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

Francis J. Ortman, III (State Bar No. 213202)

Robb D. McFadden (State Bar No. 258569)

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

Brandon R. McKelvey (State Bar No. 217002)

Attorneys for Defendant

3M COMPANY

PATTERSON LAW GROUP, APC

Allison H. Goddard (State Bar No. 211098)

James R. Patterson (State Bar No. 211102)

JACZKO GODDARD LLP

J. Christopher Jaczko (State Bar No. 149317)

Attorneys for Plaintiff

LARA ALBERTSEN

STIPULATION OF PLAINTIFF LARA ALBERTSEN AND DEFENDANT 3M

COMPANY TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

WHEREAS, on January 5, 2011, the Court continued the Case Management Conference in this matter pursuant to the parties' Stipulation to May 4, 2011 [Doc. No. 11];

WHEREAS, on January 21, 2011, Plaintiff Lara Albertsen ("Plaintiff") filed a First Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 13];

WHEREAS, on February 4, 2011, Defendant 3M Company ("Defendant") filed an Answer to the First Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, the parties met and conferred in person on April 8, 2011 to discharge their obligations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and to discuss potential settlement of this matter;

WHEREAS, on September 21, 2011, the Court continued the Case Management Conference in this matter pursuant to the parties' Stipulation to November 30, 2011 [Doc. No. 24];

WHEREAS, the parties participated in a mediation with Michael L. Wolfram on September 21, 2011 in San Francisco, California;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that additional time is needed to continue discussions exploring settlement; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 16-2(e) and 7-12 the parties have stipulated to continue the Case Management Conference scheduled for November 30, 2011 and reschedule it for a date that is convenient to this Court on or after January 5, 2012.

THEREFORE, the parties STIPULATE and agree as follows:

(1) That the Case Management Conference scheduled for November 30, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. be rescheduled to a date and time convenient to this Court on or after January 5, 2012;

(2) That all Rule 26 Meet and Confer deadlines be continued and re-calendared based on the date of the rescheduled Case Management Conference; and

(3) The parties may request that the new deadline for submitting a Joint Case Management Statement be converted to a Joint or Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

By Francis J. Ortman, III

Brandon R. McKelvey

Robb D. McFadden

Attorneys for Defendant

3M COMPANY

PATTERSON LAW GROUP APC

BY James R. Patterson

Attorneys for Plaintiff

LARA ALBERTSEN

ORDER

PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, and finding good cause therein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the:

Case Management Conference scheduled for November 30, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. is continued to January 19, 2012 at 3:30 p.m. All Rule 26 Meet and Confer deadlines are continued and re-calendared based on the date of the rescheduled Case Management Conference. Absent unforeseen exigent circumstances, no further continuances of the Case Management Conference will be granted.

Plaintiff's counsel is to set up the conference call with all the parties on the line and call chambers at (510) 637-3559. (No party shall contact chambers directly without prior authorization of the Court.)

Plaintiff(s) is directed to serve a copy of this Order at once on all parties to this action in accordance with the provisions of Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure not enrolled in the e-filing program. Following service, the party causing the service shall file a certificate of service with the Clerk of Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

HON. SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT JUDGE


Summaries of

Albertsen v. 3M Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 29, 2011
Case No.: C 10-04610 SBA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)
Case details for

Albertsen v. 3M Co.

Case Details

Full title:LARA ALBERTSEN, Plaintiff, v. 3M COMPANY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 29, 2011

Citations

Case No.: C 10-04610 SBA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)