Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04373/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04373-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 

HOWARD L. MAGEE, State Bar No.: 185199 

howard.magee@ogletreedeakins.com

GREGORY C. CHENG State Bar No.: 226865 

gregory.cheng@ogletreedeakins.com

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 

633 West Fifth Street, 53rd Floor 

Los Angeles, California 90071 

Telephone: (213) 239-9800 

Facsimile: (213) 239-9045 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Gilbane Building Company, Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SUSAN IVERSON, 

Plaintiff,

 v. 

GILBANE BUILDING COMPANY, 

 Defendants.

Case No. C06-04373 RMW 

STIPULATION AND [] 

ORDER TO CONTINUE THE CASE 

MANAGEMENT FOR NINETY 

DAYS PENDING THE 

COMPLETION OF MEDIATION 

Location: Dept. 6 

Judge: Ronald M. Whyte 

Action Filed: July 24, 2006 

Trial Date: None 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

1. 

4467791_1.DOC STIPULATION AND [] ORDER TO CONTINUE THE 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; CASE NO. C 06-04373 RMW 

/ / / 

Case 5:06-cv-04373-RMW Document 19 Filed 10/25/06 Page 1 of 4
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 

STIPULATION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiff 

Susan Iverson (“Plaintiff”), in pro per and Defendant Gilbane Building Company, Inc. 

(“Defendant”) by their attorneys of record – Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart 

P.C., by Gregory C. Cheng, attorney at law (collectively “Parties”), that the following 

Stipulation may be entered as an Order by the Court to give effect to the stipulations set 

forth below: 

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Susan Iverson (“Plaintiff”) filed her Complaint for 

damages on July 24, 2006; 

WHEREAS, the Parties stipulated to participate in court-sponsored 

mediation in an effort to resolve the instant dispute; 

WHEREAS, the Case Management Conference has been set for October 27, 

2006; 

WHEREAS, on October 10, 2006, this Court ordered the Parties to 

participate in court-sponsored mediation; 

WHEREAS, the clerk of the Alternative Dispute Resolution department has 

scheduled an ADR telephone conference for October 24, 2006; 

WHEREAS, the Parties have completed their Rule 26(f) conference and 

have filed their Joint Rule 26(f) Report and Joint Case Management Conference Statement; 

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the Case Management Conference should 

be continued for ninety (90) days pending the outcome of mediation; 

WHEREAS, the parties are hopeful that they can resolve the instant matter 

provided that they have adequate time and resources to prepare and engage in mediation; 

1. 

4467791_1.DOC STIPULATION AND [] ORDER TO CONTINUE THE 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; CASE NO. C 06-04373 RMW 

WHEREAS, if the Court sets a pretrial scheduling order at the Case 

Management Conference on October 27, 2006, including a discovery plan, the settlement 

process may be jeopardized by the significant expenditure of costs and preparation time 

associated with commencement of the discovery process. These resources can instead be 

Case 5:06-cv-04373-RMW Document 19 Filed 10/25/06 Page 2 of 4
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 

devoted to good faith settlement discussions, if the Case Management Conference were 

continued by at least ninety (90) days; 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby STIPULATE AND AGREE through 

their respective counsel of record, as follows: 

1. The Case Management Conference shall be continued from October 27, 2006 

to January 29, 2007, or a date thereafter convenient for the Court. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED ON THE DATES INDICATED BELOW.

DATED: October 23, 2006 SUSAN IVERSON 

By /s/ Susan Iverson

Susan Iverson 

Appearing In Pro Per

DATED: October 23, 2006 HOWARD L. MAGEE 

GREGORY C. CHENG 

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK 

& STEWART, P.C. 

By /s/ Gregory Cheng

Gregory C. Cheng 

Attorneys for Defendant Gilbane Building 

Company, Inc. 

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, AND PURSUANT TO 

STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED that the Case Management Conference shall be 

continued from October 27, 2006 to January 29, 2007, or to a date thereafter convenient for 

the Court. 

DATED: ______________________ Honorable Ronald M. Whyte 

United States District Court Judge 

2. 

4467791_1.DOC STIPULATION AND [] ORDER TO CONTINUE THE 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; CASE NO. C 06-04373 RMW 

Case 5:06-cv-04373-RMW Document 19 Filed 10/25/06 Page 3 of 4
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 

PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Leticia Rivera, declare: 

I am and was at the time of the service mentioned in this declaration, 

employed in the County of Los Angeles, California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. My business address is Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, 

Smoak & Stewart, P.C., 633 West Fifth Street, 53rd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90071. 

On October 23, 2006, I served a copy(ies) of the following document(s): 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE THE 

CASE MANAGEMENT FOR NINETY DAYS PENDING THE COMPLETION OF 

MEDIATION

on the parties to this action by placing them in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as 

follows: 

Attorney Party(ies) Served Method of 

Service 

Susan Iverson 

5088 Barron Park Drive 

San Jose, CA 95136 

Telephone: (408) 813-0592 

In Propria Persona U.S. Mail and 

E-mail 

(BY MAIL) I placed the sealed envelope(s) for collection and mailing by 

following the ordinary business practices of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, 

Smoak & Stewart, P.C., Los Angeles, California. I am readily familiar 

with Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.’s practice for 

collecting and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United 

States Postal Service, said practice being that, in the ordinary course of 

business, correspondence with postage fully prepaid is deposited with the 

United States Postal Service the same day as it is placed for collection. 

(BY ELECTRONIC MAIL) I caused the foregoing document(s) to be 

transmitted electronically as a .pdf file(s) from my computer to the e-mail 

addressee(s) noted below: 

Susan Iverson whose e-mail address is: susaniverson@yahoo.com.

I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this 

court, at whose direction this service was made. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct, and this declaration was executed on October 23, 2006, at Los Angeles, California. 

/s/ Leticia Rivera 

Leticia Rivera 

1. 

4467791_1.DOC PROOF OF SERVICE; CASE NO. C 06-04373 RMW

Case 5:06-cv-04373-RMW Document 19 Filed 10/25/06 Page 4 of 4