Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03960/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03960-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ENLARGE TIME 

RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF BILL OF COSTS

Case No. 3:05-CV-03960 EMC 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DUANE B. BEESON, SBN 20215 

LISA W. PAU, SBN 201114 

BEESON, TAYER & BODINE, APC 

1404 Franklin Street, 5th Floor 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Telephone: 510.625.9700 

Facsimile: 510.625.8275 

Email: lpau@beesontayer.com 

GEORGE N. DAVIES, Admitted Pro Hac Vice 

NAKAMURA, QUINN, WALLS, WEAVER & DAVIES LLP 

2204 Lakeshore Drive, Suite 130 

Birmingham, AL 35209 

Telephone: 205.870.9989 

Facsimile: 205.803.4143 

Email: davies@nqwlaw.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PAUL L. GUIDRY, 

Plaintiff,

v. 

MARINE ENGINEERS’ BENEFICIAL 

ASSOCIATION, et al., 

Defendants.

Case No. 3:05-CV-03960 CRB 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO ENLARGE TIME RE: 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REVIEW 

BILL OF COSTS 

Civil L. R. 6-2 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties that the hearing on Plaintiff’s 

Motion for Review of Bill of Costs be continued until January 30, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. before 

Magistrate Judge Edward M. Chen in Courtroon C, 15th floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San 

Francisco, CA 94102. 

EMC

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 181 Filed 11/28/07 Page 1 of 2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ENLARGE TIME 

RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF BILL OF COSTS

Case No. 3:05-CV-03960 EMC 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The reason for the requested enlargement of time is that the parties are currently 

negotiating an agreement to resolve the matter. 

It is further stipulated that, in the event a hearing becomes necessary, Defendant shall 

have until January 9, 2008 to file an Opposition to said Motion, and Plaintiff shall have until 

January 16, 2007 to file an optional Reply. 

Pursuant to the Court’s General Order 45, the filer of this document, Beeson, Tayer & 

Bodine, hereby attests that it has obtained concurrence in this filing from the other party 

signatory hereto, as indicated below. 

SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: November 27, 2007 BEESON, TAYER & BODINE, APC 

By: /s/ Lisa W. Pau 

 LISA W. PAU 

NAKAMURA, QUINN, WALLS, 

WEAVER & DAVIES LLP 

By: /s/ George N. Davies 

 GEORGE N. DAVIES 

Attorneys for MARINE ENGINEERS’ 

BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATION 

 Dated: November 27, 2007 PAUL GUIDRY in pro per

By: /s/ Paul Guidry 

 PAUL GUIDRY 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 Dated: ____________________ 

 ______________________________ 

 HON. EDWARD M. CHEN 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

November 28, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 181 Filed 11/28/07 Page 2 of 2