From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ash v. Bayside Solutions, Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 1, 2014
3:14-cv-02183-WHO (N.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2014)

Opinion

          NATALIE A. PIERCE, KAI-CHING CHA, ROXANNA IRAN, LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C., San Francisco, California, Attorneys for Defendant BAYSIDE SOLUTIONS, INC.

          ERIC M. EPSTEIN, ERIC M. EPSTEIN, APC, Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Plaintiffs JAMES WARREN ASH, TIMOTHY E. HARRIS, DAVID TROY STREVA, TIMOTHY D. BUTLER.

          Mark R. Thierman, Joshua D. Buck, Thierman Law Firm, Reno, NV, Attorneys for Plaintiffs JAMES WARREN ASH, TIMOTHY E. HARRIS, DAVID TROY STREVA, AND TIMOTHY D. BUTLER


          JOINT STIPULATION AND CONTINUING CMC AND STAYING LAWSUIT PENDING MEDIATION CONTINUING CMC AND STAYING LAWSUIT PENDING MEDIATION

          WILLIAM H. ORRICK, District Judge.

         WHEREAS, Plaintiffs JAMES WARREN ASH, TIMOTHY E. HARRIS, DAVID TROY STREVA, and TIMOTHY D. BUTLER (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a Complaint for Damages, Penalties, and Restitution ("Complaint") against Defendant BAYSIDE SOLUTIONS, INC. ("Bayside") in Alameda Superior Court on April 8, 2014;

         WHEREAS, Bayside was served with the Summons and Complaint on April 11, 2014;

         WHEREAS, Bayside removed this lawsuit to the United States District Court, Northern District of California on May 12, 2014;

         WHEREAS, in the interest of efficiency and economy, the Parties agree that there is merit in pursuing an early mediation of all issues between the parties;

         WHEREAS, a case management conference is scheduled for August 12, 2014;

         WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to voluntarily mediate this lawsuit and have already secured a commitment with respected mediator Michael J. Loeb, Esq. to conduct mediation on October 17, 2014;

         WHEREAS, in order to have effective discussions and mediate this case, the parties have agreed to an informal exchange of discovery regarding Plaintiffs' claims and Defendant's defenses;

         WHEREAS, the parties want to engage in the mediation process without the litigation burdens associated with formal discovery and motion practice and have further agreed to seek a stay of the lawsuit in its entirety in an effort to conserve the resources of both the Court and the parties pending the completion of mediation;

         WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that the aforementioned stay shall encompass the parties' August 12, 2014 Case Management Conference and the joint case management statement;

         WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that the action shall be stayed until November 17, 2014;

         WHEREAS, the parties agree to continue the case management conference, currently scheduled for August 12, 2014, to November 18, 2014 and file an updated joint status report with the Court on or before November 3, 2014, advising the Court of the status of the mediation;

         WHEREAS, the parties request is not made for the purpose of delay or any other improper purpose.

         THEREFORE, in light of the parties' agreement to proceed to mediation and in an effort to minimize costs, the parties stipulate and agree as follows:

         1. The above-captioned lawsuit shall be stayed, in its entirety until November 17, 2014;

         2. The parties' August 12, 2014 Case Management Conference shall be continued to November 18, 2014;

         3. The parties will submit an updated joint status report to the Court by November 3, 2014 advising the Court of the status of the mediation.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

          ORDER

         Based upon the joint stipulation of all parties in the above-captioned case, and good cause appearing, it is hereby ordered that the case be stayed, in its entirety until November 17, 2014. The parties' August 12, 2014 Case Management Conference shall be continued to November 18, 2014 following the completion of mediation. The parties will submit a updated joint status report to the Court by November 3, 2014 advising the Court of the status of the mediation.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ash v. Bayside Solutions, Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 1, 2014
3:14-cv-02183-WHO (N.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2014)
Case details for

Ash v. Bayside Solutions, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JAMES WARREN ASH, TIMOTHY E. HARRIS, DAVID TROY STREVA, AND TIMOTHY D…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 1, 2014

Citations

3:14-cv-02183-WHO (N.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2014)