Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06443/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06443-9/pdf.json

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

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARTHA RIVERA, MAO HER, ALICIA

ALVAREZ, EVA ARRIOLA, PEUANG

BOUNNHONG, CHHOM CHAN, BEE

LEE, PAULA MARTINEZ, MARIA

MEDINA, MAI MEEMOUA,

MARGARITA MENDOZA, BAO NHIA

MOUA, ISIDRA MURILLO, MARIA

NAVARRO, VATH RATTANATAY,

OFELIA RIVERA, SARA RIVERA,

MARIA RODRIGUEZ, MARIA RUIZ,

MARIA VALDIVIA, SY VANG, YOUA

XIONG, and SEE YANG, 

Plaintiffs,

v.

NIBCO, INC., an Indiana corporation,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CIV F-99 6443 AWI SMS

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE

CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT OR SUMMARY

ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES, ETC.

Trial Date: February 14, 2006

On October 12, 2005, the parties filed the following stipulation:

Plaintiffs, Martha Rivera, et al., and Defendant, Nibco, Inc., by and through their

respective attorneys, STIPULATE AND AGREE as follows:

1. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment and/or summary

adjudication (cross-motions”) on September 26, 2005. In connection with those motions, the parties

filed various documents, including declarations and request for judicial notice.

2. In an effort to minimize the inconvenience to the court and themselves and

to avoid duplication filings, the parties agree that the documents filed in support of their respective

cross-motions not need be re-filed in connection with their respective oppositions to the other side’s

cross-motion. Rather, each party will file a separate pleading which will list the already-filed

documents, (i.e., declaration) that the party is relying on to oppose the other side’s motion. In

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 320 Filed 10/19/05 Page 1 of 2
addition, in referring to the documents already on file in the respective opposing papers, the parties

will refer to the existing pleadings by including the date (September 26, 2005) after or before the

description of the documents (i.e., Declaration of William C. Hahesy (9/26/05.)

DATED: October 11, 2005. THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY EMPLOYMENT

LAW CENTER

__/s/ Willie N. Nguyen__ __________

Willie N. Nguyen

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DATED: October 12, 2005. SAGASER, JONES & HAHESY

__/s/ William C. Hahesy_____________

William C. Hahesy, 

Attorneys for Defendant 

NIBCO, INC.

ORDER

After considering the above stipulation, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. In connection with oppositions to summary judgment motions and to avoid the refiling of documents, each party will file a separate pleading which will list the

already-filed documents, that the party is relying on to oppose the other side’s

motion;

2. In referring to the documents already on file in the respective opposing papers, the

parties will refer to the existing pleadings by including the date (September 26, 2005)

after or before the description of the documents (e.g., Declaration of William C.

Hahesy (9/26/05.), and, in addition, will specify the particular pages or paragraphs

that specifically support that party’s position/opposition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 18, 2005 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 320 Filed 10/19/05 Page 2 of 2