From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Armstrong v. Merced Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION
Jan 11, 2012
CASE NO.: 1:11-CV-01632-LJO-SKO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO.: 1:11-CV-01632-LJO-SKO

01-11-2012

MARTHA ARMSTRONG, KERED ARMSTRONG, a Minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, MARTHA ARMSTRONG, Plaintiffs, v. MERCED COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT D. PONCE ROBERT D. PONCE Attorney for Plaintiffs TRIMBLE, SHERINIAN & VARANINI JEROME M. VARANINI Attorneys for Defendants


ROBERT D. PONCE (State Bar No.: 108069)

LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT D. PONCE

Attorney for Plaintiffs,

MARTHA ARMSTRONG and KERED ARMSTRONG,

a Minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem,

MARTHA ARMSTRONG

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

Counsel for the parties, Robert Ponce, Law Offices of Robert D. Ponce on behalf of plaintiffs ARMSTRONG and Jerome Varanini, Trimble, Sherinian & Varanini, counsel for defendants MERCED COUNTY, et al., hereby agree and stipulate to continue the Mandatory Scheduling Conference, currently set for hearing before the U.S. Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on January 31, 2012 at 9:45 AM. The grounds for said stipulation and request for an Order continuing the conference are based on the following:

1. Service has not been completed upon the remaining defendant ROXIE LONCTOT, R.N. All other defendants have been served and have answered the complaint.

2. Plaintiffs' counsel has been informed that defendants names designated as NURSE ROXIE and R. LONCTOT, R.N. are one and the same person. Thus, service needs to be completed upon the defendant whose name is believed to be ROXIE LONCTOT, R.N.

3. Plaintiffs' counsel needs additional time to locate and serve said defendant. Plaintiffs' counsel is now resorting to investigative tools to locate said defendant.

4. The parties agree to rescheduling the Mandatory Scheduling Conference to April 5, 2012 at 10:00 A.M. to allow plaintiffs' counsel to locate and serve defendant R. LONCTOT, R.N.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT D. PONCE

By: _________

ROBERT D. PONCE

Attorney for Plaintiffs

TRIMBLE, SHERINIAN & VARANINI

By: _________

JEROME M. VARANINI

Attorneys for Defendants

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties' Stipulation, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Scheduling Conference currently set for January 31, 2012, be continued to April 5, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Armstrong v. Merced Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION
Jan 11, 2012
CASE NO.: 1:11-CV-01632-LJO-SKO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2012)
Case details for

Armstrong v. Merced Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:MARTHA ARMSTRONG, KERED ARMSTRONG, a Minor, by and through his Guardian ad…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION

Date published: Jan 11, 2012

Citations

CASE NO.: 1:11-CV-01632-LJO-SKO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2012)