Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00041/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00041-2/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE PENDING A RULING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

61045013v.1 

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 

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 

Kristina M. Launey (SBN 221335) 

klauney@seyfarth.com 

Lindsay S. Fitch (SBN 238227) 

lfitch@ seyfarth.com 

Christopher J. Truxler (SBN 282354) 

ctruxler@seyfarth.com 

400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350 

Sacramento, California 95814-4428 

Telephone: (916) 448-0159 

Facsimile: (916) 558-4839 

Attorneys for Defendants 

WINCO HOLDINGS, INC. 

dba WINCO FOODS 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SIBOU PHOMTHEVY, an individual, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

WINCO HOLDINGS, INC. d/b/a 

WINCO FOODS, a corporation and 

DOES 1–100. 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 2:19-cv-00041-KJM-CKD 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 

PENDING A RULING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

Complaint Filed: October 15, 2018 

Case 2:19-cv-00041-KJM-CKD Document 39 Filed 01/15/20 Page 1 of 4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE PENDING A RULING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

61045013v.1 

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 

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 

Plaintiff SIBOU PHOMTHEVY (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant WINCO HOLDINGS, INC. 

(“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”), pursuant to Eastern District Local Rules 143 and 144, 

stipulate and agree that good cause exists to stay the Court’s settlement conference pending a ruling on 

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss: 

WHEREAS, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

12(b)(6) on August 7, 2019, which would dispose of the entire action; 

WHEREAS, the Parties have engaged in extensive meet and confer efforts and motion practice 

since Defendant removed the action to this Court; 

WHEREAS, the Court’s ruling on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss will impact the claims at issue 

in the litigation and will impact the scope of discovery and scheduling of discovery and motions; 

WHEREAS, absent a ruling on the Motion to Dismiss, the parties will be unable to participate in 

a productive settlement conference; 

WHEREAS, the Parties believe that a stay pending a ruling on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss 

will secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this action by allowing the Court to 

resolve fundamental legal questions before the Parties undertake the time and expense of engaging in a 

settlement conference; 

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:19-cv-00041-KJM-CKD Document 39 Filed 01/15/20 Page 2 of 4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE PENDING A RULING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

61045013v.1 

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 

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 

DATED: January 15, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 

By: /s/ Christopher J. Truxler 

Kristina M. Launey 

Lindsay S. Fitch 

Christopher J. Truxler 

Attorneys for Defendant 

WINCO HOLDINGS INC. 

DATED: January 15, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

ABRAMSON LABOR GROUP 

By: /s/ Christina Begakis 

Christina Begakis 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

SIBOU PHOMTHEVY

Plaintiff has agreed with the contents of this 

document and authorized the filer to use his 

electronic signature. 

 

Case 2:19-cv-00041-KJM-CKD Document 39 Filed 01/15/20 Page 3 of 4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE PENDING A RULING ON 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

61045013v.1 

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 

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 

ORDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS SO ORDERED 

that the settlement conference set for January 21, 2020 is VACATED pending a ruling on Defendant’s 

Motion to Dismiss. The Court will reschedule a settlement conference after the Motion to Dismiss is 

ruled upon and the parties have had an opportunity to conduct discovery. 

Dated: January 15, 2020 

Case 2:19-cv-00041-KJM-CKD Document 39 Filed 01/15/20 Page 4 of 4