The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Judge
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER
Discovery Cut-Off: 3/30/11
Non-Dispositive Motion Filing Deadline: 4/15/11
Ctrm. 8 Hearing Date: 5/20/11 9:00
Deadline: 4/29/11 Dispositive Motion Filing
Dispositive Motion Hearing Date: 6/6/11 10:00
Ctrm. 3 Settlement Conference Date: 4/6/11 11:00
Ctrm. 8 Pre-Trial Conference Date: 7/11/11 11:00
Ctrm. 3 Trial Date: 8/23/11 9:00
I. Date of Scheduling Conference
II. Appearances Of Counsel
Moore Law Firm, P.C. by Tanya Levinson Moore, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.
Weston Herzog LLP by Jonathon J. Herzog, Esq., appeared on behalf of Defendant.
III. Summary of Pleadings
1. This is a civil rights action by Plaintiff Ronald Moore for discrimination at the building, structure, facility, complex, property, land, development, and/or surrounding business complex known as: Office Depot Store, located at 2736 E. Divisadero Street, Fresno, California 93721. Moore seeks damages, injunctive and declaratory relief, attorney fees and costs, against Office Depot, Inc.
2. Defendant Office Depot, Inc. denies any intentional discrimination and is in the process of investigating the allegations of noncompliance set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint.
IV. Orders Re Amendments To Pleadings
1. The caption of the Complaint has been amended to delete any Defendants except Office Depot, Inc. The parties do not anticipate amending the pleadings at this time. The deadline for any amendments to pleadings shall be October 1, 2010, absent good cause shown for later amendment.
A. Admitted Facts Which Are Deemed Proven Without Further Proceedings
1. Defendant Office Depot, Inc. is a corporation licensed to do and doing business in the State of California.
2. Office Depot operates and leases the store at issue.
3. The store is a public accommodation facility open to the public, intended for nonresidential use and whose operation affects commerce.
1. All remaining facts are disputed, including whether Defendant has complied with Federal and State statutes and the feasibility of corrections of any non-compliance items.
2. There is no dispute over liability between landlord and tenant.
1. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. §§ ...