Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bay Area Painters and Tapers Pension Trust Fund, et al v. Au Technologies

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 10, 2012

BAY AREA PAINTERS AND TAPERS PENSION TRUST FUND, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
AU TECHNOLOGIES, INC., A MICHIGAN DOMESTIC PROFIT CORPORATION,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable Charles R. Breyer

REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE and [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

Date: October 12, 2012 Time: 8:30 a.m. Location: 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA Ctrm: 6, 17th Floor

1. This action was filed on June 16, 2011 (Dkt. #1) to compel Defendants' compliance 18 with its collective bargaining agreement. 19

2. As the Court's Minute Order (Dkt. #29) reflects, Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment hearing went forward as scheduled on April 13, 2012, and the matter was taken under 21 submission. That same day, the Court issued an Order (Dkt. #30) requiring Defendant to comply 22 with an audit within 90 days to determine the exact amount owed to Plaintiffs for unpaid 23 contributions. The deadline for Defendant to do so was July 12, 2013. 24

3. Plaintiffs served the Court's Order on Defendant, but Defendant has not responded 20 25 or otherwise complied with the audit or any other facets of the Court's Order. Defendant is located 26 in Michigan, which makes it difficult for Plaintiffs to contact Defendant or otherwise induce 27 Defendant's compliance. 28

4. As the Court noted in its Order, because Defendant has failed to submit its reports or comply with the audit, it is difficult-if not impossible-for Plaintiffs or the Court to ascertain 2 the amounts due in this matter. 3

5. In the interests of conserving the resources of the Court and of Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs 4 are concurrently filing a supplemental declaration detailing the fees and costs incurred by 5 Plaintiffs (due under the Collective Bargaining Agreement, Trust Agreements and ERISA) and 6 asking that the Court enter judgment solely on these easily ascertainable amounts. Plaintiffs are 7 additionally requesting that the order that Defendant is in contempt for failing to abide by the 8 Court's Order.

Therefore, there are no issues that need to be addressed at the currently scheduled Case Management Conference. In the interest of conserving costs as well as the Court's time and 10 resources, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management Conference, currently 11 scheduled for October 12, 2012, be taken off calendar. 12

I declare under penalty of perjury that I am the attorney for the Plaintiffs in the above 13 entitled action, and that the foregoing is true of my own knowledge. 14

Executed this 5th day of October, 2012, at San Francisco, California. SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION By: /S/ Blake E. Williams Attorneys for Plaintiffs

IT IS SO ORDERED. 21

The currently set Initial Case Management Conference is hereby continued to

______________________ at _______________. All related dead

December 14, 2012 8:30 a.m.

lines are hereby extended accordingly. TES DISTRI

IT IS SO ORDERED

Charles R. Breyer Judge O

20121010

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.