UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 2, 2011
F.G. CROSTHWAITE AND RUSSELL E. BURNS, IN THEIR RESPECTIVE CAPACITIES AS TRUSTEES, OF THE OPERATING ENGINEERS' HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA; PLAINTIFFS,
EL CAMINO PAVING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; MONICA ALVA, AN INDIVIDUAL; MARIE SANTELLAN ALVA, AN INDIVIDUAL; MELISSA ALVA CAMPOS, AN INDIVIDUAL; STEPHANIE ALVA, AN INDIVIDUAL. DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: The Honorable Samuel Conti
Muriel B. Kaplan, Esq. (SBN 124607) Michele R. Stafford, Esq. (SBN 172509) 2 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110 3 San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 882-7900 4 (415) 882-9287 -- Facsimile email@example.com 5 firstname.lastname@example.org 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 7 8
REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Date: December 9, 2011 Time: 10:00 a.m. Courtroom: 1, 17th Floor 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102
Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management Conference currently scheduled 21 for December 9, 2011, at 10:00 a.m., be continued for approximately sixty (60) days, as follows: 22 1. A Complaint was filed in this action on August 16, 2011 for contributions due to 23 the Trust Funds for work performed by Defendant El Camino Paving, Inc.'s employees. 24 2. Prior to service, Defendant requested a payment plan to satisfy all amounts due.
The payment plan was in the form of a Stipulated Judgment ("Stipulation"). Defendant was 26 provided with the Stipulation, and pursuant to Plaintiff Trust Funds' policy, also requested that the 27 officers of the company personally guarantee all amounts due on the Stipulation.
3. Defendant submitted one payment towards the Stipulation, but has refused to execute the agreement.
4. On November 14, 2011, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint against Defendant El Camino Paving, Inc., naming all individual officers associated with the company. An 4 Amended Summons naming all Defendants was issued on November 15, 2011.
5. Plaintiffs are in the process of serving all Defendants.
6. There are therefore no issues that need to be addressed at the
7. Therefore, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management Conference be 9 continued for approximately sixty (60) days in order to allow Plaintiffs time to complete service of 10 the Amended Complaint and Summons on all named Defendants, and allow time for Defendants 11 to file an Answer to the Amended Complaint. 12
The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for December 9, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. is 19 hereby continued to March 9, 2012. All related deadlines are extended accordingly. 20 21
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.