Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-04384/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-04384-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination

---

Case No. 09-04384 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

STAYING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER 

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 

8021696_2 

VICTORIA L. H. BOOKE, State Bar No. 142518 

FAHMY & BOOKE 

606 N. First Street 

San Jose, California 95112 

Telephone: (408) 286-7000 

Facsimile: (408) 286-7111 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

DELICIA NIAMI 

THOMAS M. MCINERNEY, State Bar No. 162055 

tmm@ogletreedeakins.com

GREGORY C. CHENG, State Bar No. 226865 

gregory.cheng@ogletreedeakins.com

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

Steuart Tower, Suite 1300 

One Market Plaza 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Telephone: (415) 442-4810 

Facsimile: (415) 442-4870 

Attorneys for Defendants 

FEDEX OFFICE AND PRINT SERVICES, INC. and 

PAUL LATTER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DELICIA NIAMI, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

FEDEX OFFICE AND PRINT SERVICES, 

INC., a Texas corporation doing business in 

California, PAUL LATTER, and DOES 1 

through 50, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 09-04384 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER CONTINUING CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

STAYING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE 

ORDER SETTING THE INITIAL CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

ADR DEADLINES 

Action Filed: June 15, 2009 

Trial Date: None set 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

**E-Filed 1/6/2010**

-----------------

Case 5:09-cv-04384-JF Document 17 Filed 01/06/10 Page 1 of 5
 1 Case No. 09-04384 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

STAYING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER 

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 

8021696_2 

STIPULATION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between plaintiff Delicia Niami 

(“plaintiff”) and her attorneys of record, Fahmy & Booke, by Victoria L. H. Booke, attorney at law 

and defendants FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc. (“FedEx Office”) and Paul Latter (“Latter”) 

(collectively “defendants”), by their attorneys of record, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & 

Stewart, P.C., by Gregory C. Cheng, attorney at law, that the following Stipulation may be entered 

as an Order by the Court to give effect to the stipulations set forth below: 

1. WHEREAS, plaintiff filed her Complaint on June 15, 2009 in the Santa Clara 

Superior Court against defendants alleging (1) sex orientation and gender discrimination pursuant 

to the California Fair Employment & Housing Act (“FEHA”); (2) retaliation pursuant to FEHA; (3) 

harassment pursuant to FEHA; and (4) breach of contract; 

2. WHEREAS, on September 17, 2009, defendants filed its Answers to the Complaint 

in the Santa Clara Superior Court, and asserted as an affirmative defense that this case was subject 

to an arbitration agreement; 

3. WHEREAS, on September 17, 2009, FedEx Office removed the entire action to the 

United States District Court, Northern District of California on the grounds that complete diversity 

exists between the Parties. FedEx Office alleged that Latter was a sham defendant and was joined 

solely for the purpose of destroying diversity; 

4. WHEREAS, on October 15, 2009, plaintiff brought her timely Motion for Remand 

to the Superior Court on the basis that complete diversity exists between the Parties, and Latter, as 

a potentially liable defendant, was not a sham defendant, and this Court took that Motion off 

calendar in or about November 2009. Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand has been rescheduled to be 

heard on February 19, 2010; 

5. WHEREAS, because the parties have a dispute as to whether the case should be in 

arbitration, defendants have scheduled a motion to compel this entire action to binding arbitration 

on February 19, 2010; 

6. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court’s Order Setting Initial Case Management 

Conference and ADR Deadlines, the parties have various deadlines arising on December 30, 2009 

Case 5:09-cv-04384-JF Document 17 Filed 01/06/10 Page 2 of 5
 2 Case No. 09-04384 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

STAYING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER 

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 

8021696_2 

and January 13, 2010; 

7. WHEREAS, the case management conference is currently scheduled for January 

22, 2010 and the joint case management conference statement is due on January 12, 2010; and 

8. WHEREAS, the parties agree that in the interests of conserving resources of the 

parties and the Court, a short continuance of the case management conference, and a stay of the 

initial scheduling obligations (Rule 26, initial disclosures) and discovery pending the determination 

of the motion to compel arbitration (hearing on February 19, 2010) is therefore prudent. 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, through their respective counsel of record AGREE 

AND HEREBY STIPULATE to continue the case management conference from January 22, 

2010 to a date after the Court’s determines defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. The Parties 

further stipulate that its obligations under the Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference 

and ADR Deadlines be stayed pending the outcome of defendants’ motion to compel arbitration 

currently scheduled for February 19, 2010. 

DATED: January 4, 2010 FAHMY & BOOKE 

By: _______/s/ Victoria L. H. Booke_____________

VICTORIA L.H. BOOKE 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

DELICIA NIAMI 

DATED: January 4, 2010 OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & 

STEWART, P.C. 

By: ______/s/ Gregory C. Cheng________________

Gregory C. Cheng 

Attorneys for Defendants 

FEDEX OFFICE AND PRINT SERVICES, INC. 

and PAUL LATTER 

Case 5:09-cv-04384-JF Document 17 Filed 01/06/10 Page 3 of 5
 3 Case No. 09-04384 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

STAYING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER 

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 

8021696_2 

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 

case management conference be continued from January 22, 2010 to ____________________, 

2010 and that the Parties’ obligations under the Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference 

and ADR Deadlines are stayed pending the outcome of defendants’ motion to compel arbitration 

currently scheduled to be heard on February 19, 2010. 

DATED: By: 

Hon. Jeremy Fogel 

United States District Court Judge 

March 19

1/5/2010

Case 5:09-cv-04384-JF Document 17 Filed 01/06/10 Page 4 of 5
 4 Case No. 09-04384 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

STAYING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER 

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 

8021696_2 

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45

I, Gregory C. Cheng, hereby declare as follows: 

I am one of the attorneys of record for defendants FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc. and 

Paul Latter in this action and am duly licensed to practice law in the State California and in the 

United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 

I hereby attest that concurrence from plaintiff’s attorney, Victoria L. H. Booke, has been 

obtained in the filing of this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND STAYING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE ORDER 

SETTING THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND ADR DEADLINES. 

I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that 

the foregoing is true and correct and, if called as a witness, I could testify competently thereto. 

Executed at San Francisco, California, this 4th day of January 2010. 

 By: /s/ Gregory C. Cheng 

 Gregory C. Cheng 

Case 5:09-cv-04384-JF Document 17 Filed 01/06/10 Page 5 of 5