Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05467/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05467-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement

---

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

Michele R. Stafford, Esq. (SBN 172509)

Erica J. Russell, Esq. (SBN 274494)

SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION

44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110

San Francisco, CA 94104

(415) 882-7900

(415) 882-9287 – Facsimile

mstafford@sjlawcorp.com

erussell@sjlawcorp.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRICKLAYERS LOCAL NO. 3 PENSION 

TRUST, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

PRECISION MASONRY

Defendant.

Case No.: CV13-05467 TEH

PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON 

Date: March 2, 2015

Time: 1:30 p.m.

Location: 450 Golden Gate Ave.

San Francisco

Courtroom: 12, 19th Floor 

Judge: Honorable Thelton E. Henderson

Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management Conference, currently on calendar 

for March 2, 2015, be continued for approximately sixty (60) days. Good cause exists for the 

granting of the continuance, as follows:

1. As the Court’s records will reflect, this action was filed on November 26, 2013.

Precision Masonry was served on December 2, 2013, and a Proof of Service of Summons was 

filed with the Court on December 4, 2013 (Dkt. #7).

2. On December 30, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a Request for Entry of Default, and on 

January 6, 2014 the Court entered Defendant’s default. 

3. As Defendant paid the attorneys’ fees and cost owed to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs

anticipated dismissing this action; however, prior to the dismissal being filed, Defendant failed to

-1-

PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

CASE NO.: CV13-05467 TEH 

P:\CLIENTS\BRICL\PRECISION MASONRY\PLEADINGS\REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC 021815.DOC

Case 3:13-cv-05467-TEH Document 33 Filed 02/23/15 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

permit an audit of its records for the period of July 10, 2010 through March 30, 2014 as required 

under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Therefore, Plaintiffs requested a continuance of the 

Case Management Conference on August 5, 2014 to allow sufficient time for Defendants to

comply with the audit request and to provide all of the documents necessary for the audit to be 

completed. On August 6, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ Request to Continue, and the Case 

Management Conference was rescheduled to November 24, 2014. 

4. Defendant provided Plaintiffs’ auditors with the last remaining documents 

necessary for the completion of the audit. The audit review was completed and no discrepancies 

were found.

5. On November 17, 2014, Plaintiffs requested a continuance to the Case 

Management Conference because, although no amounts were found due by Defendant pursuant to 

the audit, Defendant became delinquent for August and September 2014 contributions and

Plaintiffs issued a demand letter to Defendant requesting submission of its delinquent contribution 

reports and payments. On November 19, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ Request to Continue, 

and the Case Management Conference was rescheduled to February 23, 2015. 

6. On December 4, 2014, the Court’s Clerk issued a Notice rescheduling the Case 

Management Conference to March 2, 2015. 

7. Defendant has paid principal contributions for hours worked by its employees 

through December 2014. However, Defendant still owes liquidated damages and interest assessed 

on its prior late-paid contributions, as well as additional attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by 

Plaintiffs in this action. 

8. Plaintiffs will make one final attempt to resolve this matter informally with 

Defendant. If the parties are unable to resolve this matter informally, Plaintiffs anticipate filing a 

Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant. 

9. Based on the above, there are no issues that need to be addressed by the parties at 

the currently scheduled Case Management Conference. In the interest of conserving costs as well 

as the Court’s time and resources, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court continue the 

-2-

PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

CASE NO.: CV13-05467 TEH 

P:\CLIENTS\BRICL\PRECISION MASONRY\PLEADINGS\REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC 021815.DOC

Case 3:13-cv-05467-TEH Document 33 Filed 02/23/15 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

currently scheduled Case Management Conference for approximately sixty (60) days.

I declare under penalty of perjury that I am the attorney for the Plaintiffs in the 

above entitled action, and that the foregoing is true of my own knowledge.

Executed this 18th day of February 2015, at San Francisco, California.

SALTZMAN & JOHNSON

LAW CORPORATION

By: /S/

Michele R. Stafford

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The currently set Case Management Conference is hereby continued to 

__________________________ at __________________, and all previously set deadlines and 

dates related to this case are continued accordingly.

Date: ____________________ _________________________________________

HONORABLE THELTON E. HENDERSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

-3-

PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

CASE NO.: CV13-05467 TEH 

P:\CLIENTS\BRICL\PRECISION MASONRY\PLEADINGS\REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC 021815.DOC

May 4, 2015 1:30 p.m.

2/23/2015

Case 3:13-cv-05467-TEH Document 33 Filed 02/23/15 Page 3 of 3