UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 15, 2011
GIL CROSTHWAITE AND RUSS BURNS, IN THEIR
RESPECTIVE CAPACITIES AS TRUSTEES OF THE
OPERATING ENGINEERS' HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND, ET AL.,
PAUL T. BECK CONTRACTORS, INC., A
CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; JAMES RAY BECK,
INDIVIDUALLY, AND DBA JRB GRADING & PAVING
AKA JRB GRADING & PAVING, LLC., A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable Samuel Conti
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE
Date: November 18, 2011 Time: 10:00 a.m. Courtroom: 1, 17th Floor 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102
Plaintiffs and Defendants jointly request that the Case Management Conference scheduled 26 for November 18, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. be continued for approximately 45 days, as follows:
1. On May 27, 2011, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint to include Defendants James Ray Beck, individually and doing business as JRB Grading & Paving, also known as JRB Grading & Paving, LLC.
2. On June 24, 2011, Defendants filed their Answer to the Amended Complaint.
3. On July 15, 2011, Plaintiffs filed an Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Case No. C11-0454 PJH (Operating Engineers Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. James Ray Beck, 5 individually, and dba JRB Grading & Paving aka JRB Grading & Paving, LLC) should be Related 6 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12. 7
4. On July 22, 2011, the Court issued a Related Case Order, relating
the two matters
before the Honorable Samuel Conti.
5. The Parties are currently engaged in active settlement discussions and are working 10 toward an informal resolution of this Matter. It is the consensus of the Parties that if a settlement 11 can be reached outside of Court, it will be reached in the next several weeks. All Defendants are 12 aware that if a resolution cannot be reached informally, Plaintiffs will file a Motion for Summary Judgment against all Defendants named in the Amended Complaint.
6. Given the state of the Parties' settlement discussions, there is nothing to discuss at a Case Management Conference at the present time.
7. We therefore jointly request that the Case Management Conference be continued for approximately 45 days to allow the Parties time to conclude their settlement discussions. All 18 related deadlines (such as Rule 26 disclosures) shall also be continued along with the Case Management Conference.
Dated: November 10, 2011 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAWCORPORATION 21 22 By: _____________/s/_________________ Blake E. Williams 23 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: November 10, 2011 BOHNEN, ROSENTHAL & KREEFT 25 By: _____________/s/_________________ 24 26 Sergio H. Parra Attorneys for Defendants
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The currently set Case Management Conference is hereby continued to __________________________ at __________________.
All related deadlines are extended
March 9, 2012
10:00 a.m. accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED
Judge: Honorable Samuel Conti UNITED STATE DISTRICT JUDGE
PROOF OF SERVICE:
I, the undersigned, declare:
I am employed in the County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age of 4 eighteen and not a party to this action. My business address is 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110, 5 San Francisco, California 94104.
On November 10, 2011, I served the following document(s) on the parties to this action in 7 the manner described below:
XX ELECTRONICALLY by causing said document to be electronically filed using the Court's Electronic Court Filing ("ECF") System and service was completed by electronic means by transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing on the registered participants of the ECF System.
To: Andrew B. Kreeft, Esq. Sergio H. Parra, Esq. Bohnen, Rosenthal & Kreeft 787 Munras Avenue, Suite 200 Monterey, California 93940 VIA ECF Attorneys for Defendants
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this 17 declaration was executed on this 10th day of November, 2011, at San Francisco, California.
/s/ Qui X. Lu
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.