Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-02102/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-02102-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

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

STIPULATION AND ORDER 1 BURRIS v. CITY OF PETALUMA

Case No. 4:18-cv-02102-HSG 

DAVID E. MASTAGNI (SBN 204244) 

ISAAC S. STEVENS (SBN 251245) 

ACE T. TATE (SBN 262015) 

IAN B. SANGSTER (SBN 287963) 

MASTAGNI HOLSTEDT 

A Professional Corporation 

1912 I Street 

Sacramento, California 95811-3151 

Telephone: (916) 446-4692 

Facsimile: (916) 447-4614 

davidm@mastagni.com 

istevens@mastagni.com 

atate@mastagni.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

MORIN I. JACOB (SBN 204598) 

RICHARD C. BOLANOS (SBN 111343) 

LISA S. CHARBONNEAU (SBN 245906) 

LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE

135 Main Street, 7th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Telephone: (707) 778-4362 

Facsimile: (707) 206-6040 

mjacob@lcwlegal.com 

rbolanos@lcwlegal.com 

lcharbonneau@lcwlegal.com 

Attorneys for Defendant 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

KEVIN BURRIS, on behalf of himself and 

all similarly situated individuals, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CITY OF PETALUMA, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 4:18-cv-02102-HSG 

 Complaint Filed: April 6, 2018 

COLLECTIVE ACTION - 29 U.S.C. 216(b) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO FURTHER EXTEND TIME 

FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO 

COMPLAINT AND RE-SETTING CASE 

MANAGEMENT DATES 

 

TO THE COURT AND ALL INTERESTED PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF 

RECORD: 

Case 4:18-cv-02102-HSG Document 22 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 4
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

STIPULATION AND ORDER 2 BURRIS v. CITY OF PETALUMA

Case No. 4:18-cv-02102-HSG 

WHEREAS, this putative collective action was filed on April 6, 2018, asserting the City 

of Petaluma, the named Defendant in this action, violated the overtime payment provisions of the 

Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). 

WHEREAS, the City was served the Summons and Complaint on April 16, 2018; 

WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulation, the City’s response to the Complaint is presently due 

on or by August 10, 2018 (see Dkt. No. 20); 

WHEREAS, the Parties have begun settlement discussions in an effort to resolve this 

action, which has included the City providing Plaintiffs with payroll records and other 

information pertinent to their claims; 

WHEREAS, the Parties attended a settlement conference on July 17, 2018; 

WHEREAS, the Parties are continuing to meaningfully negotiate possible settlement; 

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the City should be permitted to file a response to 

Plaintiff’s Complaint no later than October 26, 2018 to enable the Parties to focus their resources 

on the settlement of this action; 

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the initial Case Management Conference, currently set 

for August 28, 2018, should be moved to a date subsequent to October 26, 2018 – the proposed 

date for City to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint; and 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(b), the Parties request a Court order extending 

the City’s time to respond to the Complaint to October 26, 2018 and moving the initial Case 

Management Conference and related dates accordingly. 

 THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the Parties: 

1) The City of Petaluma’s time to file a response to Plaintiffs’ Complaint shall be 

October 26, 2018; 

2) The initial Case Management Conference is to be held on or after November 13, 

2018, as the Court’s calendar permits; 

3) The Joint Case Management Statement must be filed not less than seven (7) calendar 

days prior to the Case Management Conference; and 

Case 4:18-cv-02102-HSG Document 22 Filed 08/07/18 Page 2 of 4
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

STIPULATION AND ORDER 3 BURRIS v. CITY OF PETALUMA

Case No. 4:18-cv-02102-HSG 

4) The last day for the Parties to meet and confer per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

26(f) be reset accordingly. 

Respectfully Submitted: 

Dated: August 2, 2018 MASTAGNI HOLSTEDT, APC

 By: /s/ David E. Mastagni 

 DAVID E. MASTAGNI 

 ISAAC S. STEVENS 

 ACE T. TATE 

 IAN B. SANGSTER 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Dated: August 2, 2018 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 

 By: /s/ Morin I. Jacob 

 MORIN I. JACOB 

 RICHARD C. BOLANOS 

 LISA S. CHARBONNEAU 

Attorneys for Defendant 

DECLARATION OF DAVID E. MASTAGNI 

I, DAVID E. MASTAGNI, declare as follows: 

1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice in the State of California and am 

specifically admitted to practice before the Northern District of California. 

2. I am an attorney of record for Plaintiff in this action and make this declaration 

within my personal knowledge. If called upon to testify, I could and would testify competently 

with respect thereto. 

3. Since June 2018, the Parties in this case have begun meaningful and concrete 

settlement discussions. 

4. In furtherance of settlement discussions, Defendant has provided Plaintiffs with 

payroll records and other requested information pertinent to Plaintiffs’ claims in the hopes of 

settling this matter without further litigation. 

Case 4:18-cv-02102-HSG Document 22 Filed 08/07/18 Page 3 of 4
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

STIPULATION AND ORDER 4 BURRIS v. CITY OF PETALUMA

Case No. 4:18-cv-02102-HSG 

5. On July 17, 2018, the Parties met at City Hall to discuss settlement of this case. 

The discussions were productive and the Parties continue to engage in meaningful and concrete 

settlement negotiations. 

6. The Parties now seek additional time to meaningfully explore early settlement of 

this matter. Prior to this, the Parties stipulated to extend the Defendant’s time to respond to 

Plaintiffs’ Complaint from May 7, 2018 to July 6, 2018, and then again stipulated to extend the 

Defendant’s time to respond to Plaintiffs’ Complaint from July 6, 2018 to August 10, 2018. 

 5. This extension, if granted, will impact the currently scheduled Case Management 

Conference, and related deadlines, set by the Court upon filing this action. For this reason, the 

Parties are requesting this Court to move the Case Management Conference to November 13, 

2018 and re-set related dates accordingly. 

 6. I do not believe any party will be prejudiced by the granting Defendant an 

extension and continuing the Initial Case Management Conference and related deadlines, as set 

forth in the Parties’ stipulation. 

 /s/ David E. Mastagni 

 DAVID E. MASTAGNI 

ORDER 

IT IS SO ORDERED THAT: 

1. Defendant’s time to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint shall be extended to October 

26, 2018; 

2. The Initial Case Management Conference shall be continued to November 13, 

2018 at 2:00 p.m.; and 

3. The Parties must meet and confer per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) and 

must file the Joint Case Management Statement not less than seven (7) calendar days prior to the 

Initial Case Management Conference. 

Dated: __________________ __________________________________ 

 HON. HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 

 United States District Judge 

8/7/2018

Case 4:18-cv-02102-HSG Document 22 Filed 08/07/18 Page 4 of 4