From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bensi v. Bloomingdale's, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 9, 2011
No. C 11-03968 JSC (N.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2011)

Opinion

No. C 11-03968 JSC

11-09-2011

PAUL BENSI, BART FLORENCE, JERRY KALMAR, and LYLE SETTER, in their capacities as Trustees of the STATIONARY ENGINEERS LOCAL 39 PENSION TRUST FUND; and STATIONARY ENGINEERS LOCAL 39 ANNUITY TRUST FUND Plaintiffs, v. BLOOMINGDALE'S, INC., a California Corporation, Defendant.

WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation WILLIAM A. SOKOL LINDA BALDWIN JONES EZEKIELD. CARDER Attorneys for Plaintiffs JACKSON LEWIS LLP DAVID S. BRADSHAW CARY G. PALMER Attorneys for Defendant


WILLIAM A. SOKOL, Bar No. 072740

LINDA BALDWIN JONES, Bar No. 178922

EZEKIEL D. CARDER, Bar No. 206537

WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD

A Professional Corporation

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

JACKSON LEWIS LLP DAVID S. BRADSHAW, Bar No. 44888

CARY G. PALMER, Bar No. 186601

Attorneys for Defendant

STIPULATED REQUEST TO EXTEND

TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO FILE A

RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO

PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT AND TO

CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE AND RELATED

DEADLINES; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-12 and 16-2, Plaintiffs and Defendant hereby respectfully request that Defendant's time to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiffs' Complaint be extended for a period of 60 days, from November 10, 2011 to and including January 9, 2012, and that the Initial Case Management Conference scheduled for December 1, 2011 at 1:30 p.m, and related deadlines be continued for sixty (60) days to allow the Parties additional time to continue their discussions regarding a possible resolution of this action without the necessity of further litigation time and expense, as follows:

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Current Deadline ¦New Deadline ¦Description ¦ +------------------+---------------------------+------------------------------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Last day to: ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦• meet and confer re: initial ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦disclosures, early settlement,¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ADR process selection, and ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦discovery plan ¦ ¦11.10.11 ¦01.09.12 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦• file ADR certification ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦signed by Parties and Counsel ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦• file either Stipulation to ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ADR Process or Notice of Need ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦for ADR Phone Conference ¦ +------------------+---------------------------+------------------------------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Last day to: ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦• file Rule 26(f) Report ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦• complete initial disclosures¦ ¦11.24.11 ¦01.23.12 ¦or state objection in Rule 26 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦(f) Report ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦• file Case Management ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Statement per Standing Order ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦re Contents of Joint Case ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Management Statement ¦ +------------------+---------------------------+------------------------------¦ ¦12.01.11 1:30 p.m.¦01.30.12 1:30 p.m. Ctrm E ¦Initial Case Management ¦ ¦Ctrm E ¦ ¦Conference ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Plaintiffs and Defendant have been engaged in informal settlement discussions and are requesting a continuance of the time for Defendant to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiffs' Complaint and the Case Management Conference and related deadlines to allow the Parties additional time for the Defendant to provide Plaintiffs with the documents necessary for Plaintiffs' auditors to complete the audit sought in the Complaint. The Parties have not requested a prior continuance of the Case Management Conference and related deadlines.

The Parties expect that the requested extension of the date for the Initial Case Management Conference will have no adverse effect on the schedule for the case. No trial date or other deadlines have yet been set. The requested extensions may facilitate the resolution of the action. The continuance of the Case Management Conference would promote judicial efficiency as Defendant has agreed to provide the documents necessary for Plaintiffs' auditors to complete the audit sought in the Complaint,

WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD

A Professional Corporation

WILLIAM A. SOKOL

LINDA BALDWIN JONES

EZEKIELD. CARDER

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

JACKSON LEWIS LLP

DAVID S. BRADSHAW

CARY G. PALMER

Attorneys for Defendant

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Based upon the foregoing Stipulated Request to Extend Time for Defendant to File a Responsive Pleading to Plaintiffs' Complaint and to Continue Case Management Conference and Related Deadlines, the Court orders an extension of time for Defendant to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiffs' Complaint and the continuance of the Initial Case Management Conference and related deadlines for sixty (60) days, as set forth above in the Stipulated Request or as soon thereafter as a court date is available, Pursuant to U.S.C. 28 Section 636, defendant shall file a consent or declination as soon as possible.

HONORABLE JACQUELINE S. CORLEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Bensi v. Bloomingdale's, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 9, 2011
No. C 11-03968 JSC (N.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2011)
Case details for

Bensi v. Bloomingdale's, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:PAUL BENSI, BART FLORENCE, JERRY KALMAR, and LYLE SETTER, in their…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Nov 9, 2011

Citations

No. C 11-03968 JSC (N.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2011)