The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Judge
Discovery Cut-Off: 6/1/11
Non-Dispositive Motion Ctrm. 8
Hearing Date: 7/13/11 9:30
Dispositive Motion Filing Deadline: 7/1/11
Dispositive Motion Hearing Date: 8/3/11 9:30 Ctr. 8
Settlement Conference Date: 6/15/11 10:30
Ctrm. 10 Pre-Trial Conference Date: 9/7/11 2:00 Ctrm. 8
Ctrm. 8 (JT-5 days) Trial Date: 10/25/11 8:30
CONFERENCE ORDER AMENDED SCHEDULING
I. Date of Scheduling Conference. November 5, 2010.
III. Summary of Pleadings
1. This is a civil rights action by Plaintiff Theresa Wallen (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff") for discrimination at the building, structure, facility, complex, property, land, development, and/or surrounding business complex known as: BJ's Kountry Kitchen, located at 4944 North Blackstone Avenue, Fresno, California (hereinafter referred to as the "Store"). Plaintiff seeks damages, injunctive and declaratory relief, attorneys' fees and costs, against Norberto Garcia and Teresa Garcia, dba BJ's Kountry Kitchen; and Prosperity Properties TLC, LLC, owners and operators of the Restaurant (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants").
IV. Orders Re Amendments To Pleadings
1. The parties do not anticipate amending the pleadings at this time. The parties propose that any amendments be accomplished on or before December 3, 2010.
A. Admitted Facts Which Are Deemed Proven Without Further Proceedings
1. There is no dispute that the Plaintiff is disabled within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
2. Defendants Norberto Garcia and Teresa Garcia are individual residents of the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division, and doing business under the fictitious name and style BJ's Kountry Kitchen and Prosperity Properties TLC, LLC.
3. The Defendants own and operate a Restaurant under that name and style.
4. The Restaurant is a public accommodation open to the public and intended for non-residential use whose operation affects commerce.
5. The Defendants acknowledge that hidden architectural features of the Restaurant do not comply with the law.
1. All remaining facts are disputed.
1. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1342 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Supplemental jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
2. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c).
3. The parties agree that the substantive law of the State of California provides the rule of decision ...