Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01049/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01049-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities 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

GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER 28

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

P.O. BOX 28907

FRESNO, CA 93729-8907

WILLIAM H. LEIFER, #059650

wleifer@gmlegal.net

GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER

P.O. Box 28907

Fresno, CA 93729-8907

Telephone: (559) 448-9800

Facsimile: (559) 448-9899

Attorneys for Defendant Mahmood Modirzadeh 

as Trustee of the Namaki Living Trust U/D/T 

dated June 27, 2002

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE ESCOBEDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

MAHMOOD MODIRZADEH, Trustee of the 

NAMAKI LIVING TRUST U/D/T dated June 

27, 2002; SALGADO’S FAMILY GROUP 

dba LETY’S MEXICAN RESTAURANT; 

MICHAEL ENG dba J&J WIRELESS; 

JOHNY SRYAVONG dba J&J WIRELESS,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-01049-SAB

THIRD STIPULATION TO EXTEND 

TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND 

TO COMPLAINT; ORDER

Plaintiff, Jose Escobedo (“Plaintiff”), through his attorney, Defendant Mahmood 

Modirzadeh, Trustee of the Namaki Living Trust U/D/T dated June 27, 2002 (“Modirzadeh”), 

through his attorney, and Defendants Salgado’s Family Group dba Lety’s Mexican Restaurant 

(“Salgado”), Michael Eng dba J&J Wireless (“Eng”), and Johny Sryavong dba J&J Wireless 

(“Sryavong,” and together with Modirzadeh, Salgado and Eng, collectively “Defendants”), who 

are presently not represented and specially appearing pro se for purposes of obtaining this 

additional extension and continuance, hereby stipulate as follows:

Case 1:15-cv-01049-SAB Document 13 Filed 11/02/15 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

2

GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

P.O. BOX 28907

FRESNO, CA 93729-8907

1. This action arises out of Plaintiff’s claims that he is disabled, and that the property 

owned and/or operated by Defendants was and is not fully accessible to him in violation of Title 

III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189, and parallel California 

law. Plaintiff seeks an injunction requiring Defendants to make the property fully accessible to 

him, as well as damages.

2. Defendants’ responses to the complaint were initially due August 17, 2015, which 

deadline was extended by stipulation to September 14, 2015 (Dkt. 9). A second extension was 

granted to October 30, 2015.

3. The purpose of the initial extension was to permit Defendants time to obtain an 

inspection of the property by a California Certified Access Specialist (“CASp”) and subsequent 

report, to determine what, if any, barriers to access exist at the subject property and which report 

could form the basis of a resolution of Plaintiff’s equitable claims.

4. Defendants represent that substantially all of Plaintiff’s requested modifications

have been completed or are almost completed, but there has been a delay in having the CASp 

Specialist certify completion due to the Specialist having surgery. Defendants anticipate that such 

information should be obtained by November 10, 2015, which will then allow the parties to 

complete their settlement discussions.

5. A Scheduling Conference was previously set for October 13, 2015 which date was 

continued to December 1, 2015. This requested extension will not affect the hearing date.

6. The parties are optimistic that this matter will settle given Defendants’ 

representation that most of the work has been performed, and that it will therefore not be 

necessary for responsive pleadings to be filed. As such, the parties wish to conserve both the fees 

expended as well as Court resources while they exhaust settlement efforts. At this time, the only 

impediment to full settlement is having the CASp Specialist certify the work is done and 

collecting the agreed on payments.

7. For these reasons, the parties stipulate to continue the deadline to file responsive 

pleadings to November 18, 2015.

Case 1:15-cv-01049-SAB Document 13 Filed 11/02/15 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

3

GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

P.O. BOX 28907

FRESNO, CA 93729-8907

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: October 30, 2015 GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER

By: /s/ William H. Leifer

William H. Leifer

Attorneys for Defendant Mahmood Modirzadeh, 

Trustee of the Namaki Livingn Trust U/D/T dated 

June 27, 2002

DATED: October 30, 2015 MOORE LAW FIRM

By: /s/ Tanya E. Moore

Tanya E. Moore

Attorneys for Plaintiff Jose Escobedo

DATED: October 30, 2015 SALGADO’S FAMILY GROUP dba LETY’S 

MEXICAN RESTAURANT

By: /s/ Raul Salgado

Specially Appearing for the Corporation for the 

Limited Purpose of Securing an Extension and 

Continuance 

DATED: October 30, 2015

By: /s/ Michael Eng

Michael Eng dba J&J Wireless 

DATED: October 30, 2015

By: /s/ Johny Sryavong

Johny Sryavong dba J&J Wireless 

Case 1:15-cv-01049-SAB Document 13 Filed 11/02/15 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

4

GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

P.O. BOX 28907

FRESNO, CA 93729-8907

ORDER

The parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all Defendants shall have to and including November 

18, 2015 within which to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint. The Scheduling Conference shall 

remain the same. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01049-SAB Document 13 Filed 11/02/15 Page 4 of 4