Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04786/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04786-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

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

Sutton Hague 28

Law Corporation

6715 N. PALM AVENUE

SUITE 216

FRESNO, CA 93704

1 __________________________________________________________________________________________________

JOINT STIPULATION RE PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND 

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

S. BRETT SUTTON 143107

JARED HAGUE 251517

JOSEPH V. MACIAS 273168

SUTTON HAGUE LAW CORPORATION, P.C.

6715 N. Palm Avenue, Suite 216

Fresno, California 93704

Telephone: (559) 325-0500

Attorneys for PLAINTIFF

J. KEVIN LILLY, Bar No. 119981

SHANNON R. BOYCE, Bar No. 229041

RACHAEL LAVI, Bar No. 294443

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

2049 Century Park East, Fifth Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Telephone: (310) 553-0308

Attorneys for DEFENDANT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

* * *

PATRICIA BLUE, an individual,

Plaintiff,

 vs.

BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING 

COMMUNITIES, INC., a Delaware 

Corporation; and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, 

Defendant.

Case No. 3:15-cv-04786-WHA

Judge: Hon. William H. Alsup

CLASS ACTION

JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING 

PLAINTIFF’S FILING OF SECOND

AMENDED COMPLAINT AND 

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO SECOND

AMENDED COMPLAINT AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Action Filed: July 24, 2015

Trial Date: April 10, 2017

Case 3:15-cv-04786-WHA Document 27 Filed 02/08/16 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

Sutton Hague 28

Law Corporation

6715 N. PALM AVENUE

SUITE 216

FRESNO, CA 93704

2 __________________________________________________________________________________________________

JOINT STIPULATION RE PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND 

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Plaintiff PATRICIA BLUE (“Plaintiff”), by and through her counsel of record, and 

Defendant BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES, INC. (“Defendant”), by and 

through its counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

RECITALS AND JOINT STIPULATION

WHEREAS, Plaintiff desires to file a Second Amended Complaint and has provided 

Defendant with a copy of the proposed Second Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant have conferred in good faith;

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Plaintiff may have leave to file a Second Amended Complaint, a true and correct 

copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. 

2. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint will be deemed filed and served as of the 

date of the Court’s Order approving this Stipulation.

3. Defendant’s Answer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (Dkt. #1-4) will be 

deemed Defendant’s Answer to the Second Amended Complaint.

DATED: February 2, 2016

/s/ S. Brett Sutton

S. BRETT SUTTON

Attorneys for Plaintiff

PATRICIA BLUE

DATED: February 2, 2016

/s/ Shannon R. Boyce

SHANNON R. BOYCE

Attorneys for Defendant

BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING 

COMMUNITIES, INC.

Case 3:15-cv-04786-WHA Document 27 Filed 02/08/16 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

Sutton Hague 28

Law Corporation

6715 N. PALM AVENUE

SUITE 216

FRESNO, CA 93704

3 __________________________________________________________________________________________________

JOINT STIPULATION RE PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND 

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Based on the above Stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Plaintiff is granted leave to file her Second Amended Complaint, a true and 

correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.

2. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint is deemed filed and served upon entry of 

this Order.

3. Defendant’s Answer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (Dkt. #1-4) is 

deemed Defendant’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, and is deemed filed and 

served upon entry of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _________________ ________________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

February 8, 2016.

Case 3:15-cv-04786-WHA Document 27 Filed 02/08/16 Page 3 of 3