Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03175/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03175-8/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 

Page 1 – Stip. Re ADR Extension and Rescheduling the Parties’ Further CMC; Order Case No. 

C05-03175 EDL 

DILLINGHAM & MURPHY, LLP 

MARK J. ROGERS (STATE BAR NO. 173005) 

LUCY F. WANG (SBN 199772) 

225 BUSH STREET, 6TH FLOOR 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104-4207 

TELEPHONE: (415) 397-2700 

Facsimile: (415) 397-3300 

Attorneys for Defendants AA CAFÉ, INC., LILY LIU, 

YEN CHENG LIN & GREAT CHINA INVESTMENT REALTY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR DISTRICT OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

YUGUI CAI 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

FISHI CAFÉ, INC., AA CAFÉ, INC, YANGKEE CORP. (DBA YUNG KEE BBQ 

RESTAURANT), YING TSAI LIN, LILY LIU, 

YEN CHENG LIN, YUEH YING CHENG, 

GREAT CHINA INVESTMENT REALTY 

CORP. & DOES 1-10 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 05-03175 EDL 

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION TO 

COMPLETE ADR AND 

CONTINUANCE OF FEBRUARY 27, 

2007 FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE; ORDER 

Trial Date: October 29, 2007 

 Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiff Yugui Cai and Defendants AA Café, Inc., Lily Liu, 

Yen Cheng Lin, and Great China Investment Realty, through their respective attorneys, hereby 

stipulate as follows: 

WHEREAS at the Further Case Management Conference that took place on November 14, 

2006, the parties agreed to participate in the Court’s ADR Program and the matter was assigned to 

the Program on an expedited basis. 

// 

// 

// 

Case 3:05-cv-03175-EDL Document 44 Filed 02/15/07 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 

Page 2 – Stip. Re ADR Extension and Rescheduling the Parties’ Further CMC; Order Case No. 

C05-03175 EDL 

WHEREAS Daniel Bowling, a staff lawyer with the ADR Program, was subsequently 

appointed as the parties’ mediator on November 22, 2006. 

WHEREAS the parties conducted a telephone conference with Mr. Bowling on December 

15, 2006 at which time the parties schedule their mediation to take place on February 13, 2007. 

WHEREAS Mr. Bowling notified the parties on February 6, 2007 that a schedule conflict 

had arisen that necessitated the continuance of the parties’ mediation. 

WHEREAS the parties have rescheduled the mediation to take place on March 7, 2007. 

WHEREAS ADR Local Rule 6-4(b) requires that the mediation take place within 90 days 

of the date of the entry of the order referring the matter to the ADR Program (in this case the 

mediation must be completed by February 26, 2007). 

WHEREAS the March 7, 2007 falls beyond the period in which the parties’ mediation 

must take place. 

WHEREAS there is a Further Case Management Conference scheduled to take place on 

February 27, 2007. 

 WHEREAS the previous time modifications in this case include the following: On October 

10, 2006, the parties filed a stipulation for extension of time for Defendants to file a responsive 

pleading. 

 WHEREAS the non-discovery cutoff date is set on March 16, 2007. 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that the time within which to complete the parties’ 

mediation shall be extended to March 13, 2007. It is further stipulated that given the pending 

mediation, the non-expert discovery cutoff shall be extended for 30 days from March 16, 2007 to 

April 16, 2007, while all other dates in the Court’s scheduling order shall remain unchanged. It is 

also stipulated that the Further Case Management Conference set for February 27, 2007 be 

continued to March 20, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. Good cause exists for the requested extension of time 

to complete the parties’ mediation because the parties had previously agreed to a mediation before 

the expiration of the existing ADR deadline but that date needed to be rescheduled due to a last 

minute scheduling conflict by the assigned mediator and the first available date that worked for all 

parties is March 7, 2007. Good cause also exists to continue March 16, 2007 non-expert discovery 

Case 3:05-cv-03175-EDL Document 44 Filed 02/15/07 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 

Page 3 – Stip. Re ADR Extension and Rescheduling the Parties’ Further CMC; Order Case No. 

C05-03175 EDL 

cutoff date and parties’ February 27, 2007 Further Case Management Conference because if the 

parties are able to resolve their dispute during their mediation, that would vitiate the need for any 

further discovery and such conference. 

Dated: February 13, 2007 DAL BON & WANG 

By: /S/ ________________ 

ADAM WANG 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Dated: February 13, 2007 DILLINGHAM & MURPHY 

By: /S/ ________________ 

MARK J. ROGERS 

Attorneys for Defendants AA Café, Inc., Lily Liu, 

Yen Cheng Lin and Great China Investment Realty 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _______________ ________________________________________ 

 ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:05-cv-03175-EDL Document 44 Filed 02/15/07 Page 3 of 3