Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00866/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00866-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

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

Joint Stipulation to Continue Mediation Deadline / Case No. 16-cv-00866-WHA

MCCORMACK AND ERLICH LLP

Bryan J. McCormack (SBN 192418)

bryan@mcelawfirm.com

Paul K. Pfeilschiefter (SBN 301463)

paul@mcelawfirm.com

150 Post Street, Suite #742

San Francisco, California 94108

Telephone: (415) 296-8420

Facsimile: (415) 296-8552

Attorneys for Plaintiff Ernest J. Hernande

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

Andrew M. McNaught (SBN 209093)

amcnaught@seyfarth.com

Nabeel Ahmad (SBN 301172)

nahmad@seyfarth.com

560 Mission Street, 31st Floor

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 397-2823

Facsimile: (415) 397-8549

Attorneys for Defendants

RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA, INC.,

RANDSTAD INHOUSE SERVICES, L.P. (incorrectly

sued as “RANDSTAD STAFFING, U.S., L.P.”), and

CARL ZEISS MEDITEC, INC. (incorrectly sued as

“CARL ZEISS MEDITEC GROUP”)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERNEST J. HERNANDE,

Plaintiff,

v.

RANDSTAD STAFFING, U.S., L.P., a

Delaware Corporation; RANDSTAD NORTH

AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation;

CARL ZEISS MEDITEC GROUP, a New

York Corporation; and DOES 1 through 25,

inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:16-cv-00866 WHA

JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE

MEDIATION DEADLINE TO

SEPTEMBER 27, 2016

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b), 6-2, and 7-12, Plaintiff Ernest J. Hernande

(“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Randstad North America, Inc., Randstad Inhouse Services, L.P.

(incorrectly sued as “Randstad Staffing, U.S., L.P.”) (collectively “Randstad”), and Carl Zeiss

Case 3:16-cv-00866-WHA Document 31 Filed 07/12/16 Page 1 of 3
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

Joint Stipulation to Continue Mediation Deadline / Case No. 16-cv-00866-WHA

2

Meditec, Inc. (incorrectly sued as “Carl Zeiss Meditec Group”) (“Carl Zeiss”) (collectively

“Defendants”) hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, in the Court’s Case Management Order and Reference to ADR Unit for

Mediation, the Court ordered the parties to mediation within 90 days of June 1, 2016, or by

August 30, 2016;

WHEREAS, in the Court’s Notice of Appointment of Mediator filed on June 8, 2016, the

Court notified the parties that Christine Noma is assigned as the mediator;

WHEREAS, the parties have worked diligently to agree to mediation before Christine

Noma and set a mediation date. The parties have agreed, subject to the Court approving the

extension of the mediation deadline, to mediate with Christine Noma in Oakland, California on

September 27, 2016. The parties have set and Ms. Noma has approved September 27, 2016 as the

mediation date. September 27, 2016 is the earliest date all the parties and Ms. Noma are available

for mediation based on scheduling issues. Continuing the mediation deadline to September 27,

2016 will also allow the parties sufficient time to conduct discovery to make for a productive

mediation session.

NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AND STIPULATE that the mediation

deadline be continued to September 27, 2016 subject to approval by the Court.

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, there have been no other time modifications in this case, and

it is not anticipated that this extension will affect the schedule for the case. Moreover, pursuant to

Local Rule 6-2, the Declaration of Nabeel Ahmad is attached as Exhibit A to the Stipulation.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Case 3:16-cv-00866-WHA Document 31 Filed 07/12/16 Page 2 of 3
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

Joint Stipulation to Continue Mediation Deadline / Case No. 16-cv-00866-WHA

3

DATED: July 7, 2016 Respectfully submitted,

MCCORMACK AND ERLICH LLP

By: /s/ Paul K. Pfeilschiefter

Bryan J. McCormack

Paul K. Pfeilschiefter

Attorneys for Plaintiff

ERNEST J. HERNANDE

DATED: July 7, 2016 Respectfully submitted,

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

By: /s/ Nabeel Ahmad

Andrew M. McNaught

Nabeel Ahmad

Attorneys for Defendants

RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA, INC.,

RANDSTAD INHOUSE SERVICES, L.P.

(incorrectly sued as “RANDSTAD

STAFFING, U.S., L.P.”), and CARL ZEISS

MEDITEC, INC. (incorrectly sued as “CARL

ZEISS MEDITEC GROUP”)

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:____________________ By:

Hon. William H. Alsup

JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3)

I, Nabeel Ahmad, attest that concurrence in the filing of this stipulation has been obtained

from the signatory, Paul K. Pfeilschiefter, counsel for Plaintiff.

DATED: July 7, 2016 By: /s/ Nabeel Ahmad

Nabeel Ahmad

July 12, 2016.

Case 3:16-cv-00866-WHA Document 31 Filed 07/12/16 Page 3 of 3