Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06443/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06443-2/pdf.json

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

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

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 RUIZ, MARIA VALDIVIA, SY )

VANG, YOUA XIONG, and SEE YANG )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. )

)

NIBCO, INC., an Indiana Corporation, )

)

Defendant. )

____________________________________)

CIV- F-99-6443 AWI SMS

ORDER VACATING

HEARING DATE OF

AUGUST 8, 2005, AND

MOVING THE MATTER SO

AS TO BE HEARD IN

CONJUNCTION WITH

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS 

Plaintiffs have filed a Motion for Separate Trial of Plaintiffs’s Claims for Backpay. This

motion is scheduled for hearing on August 8, 2005, at 1:30 p.m. The Defendant has filed an

opposition to the motion and Plaintiffs have filed a reply to the opposition. In Defendant’s

opposition, Defendant suggests that Plaintiffs’s motion is premature. 

Currently, trial in this matter is set for February 14, 2006, with a pre-trial conference date

of December 16, 2005. The deadline for dispositive motions is set for August 22, 2005;

oppositions to dispositve motions are due September 19, 2005; any replies are due October 3,

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 273 Filed 08/08/05 Page 1 of 2
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

1

The parties have filed a stipulation and proposed order that would set the deadline for dispositive motions

at September 26, 2005, and would set the hearing on such motions for November 21, 2005. However, the magistrate

judge has yet to sign this order.

2

2005. The hearing date on the dispositive motions is set for October 17, 2005.1 Defendant

indicates that it will be filing dispositive motions and asserting defenses as to all Title VII claims

and “many, if not all, of the FEHA claims.” Whether bifurcation is necessary will depend,

therefore, on whether the parties’s dispositive motions are granted or denied. Accordingly, it is

appropriate to hear and decide Plaintiffs’s Motion for Separate Trial of Plaintiffs’s Claims for

Backpay concurrently with the dispositive motions that will be filed in this case. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The previously set hearing date of August 8, 2005, is VACATED; and

2. Plaintiffs’s Motion for Separate Trial of Plaintiffs’s Claims for Backpay will be

heard concurrently with the parties’s dispositive motions and is RESET to

October 17, 2005, at 1:30 p.m., the currently scheduled hearing date for the

parties’s dispositive motions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 5, 2005 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 273 Filed 08/08/05 Page 2 of 2