Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01043/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01043-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S EX-PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE – PAGE 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

Eric P. Escamilla #231859

LAW OFFICE OF ERIC P. ESCAMILLA

516 W. Shaw Avenue, Suite 200

Fresno, California 93704

Telephone: (559) 485-2535

Facsimile: (559) 485-2535

Email: eric@escamillalawoffices.com

Attorney for Plaintiff: ROSE CARREON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROSE CARREON,

Plaintiff,

vs.

UNITED LEGAL GROUP, PLC,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-CV-01043

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S EX-PARTE 

APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

COMES NOW, Plaintiff ROSE CARREON and requests an Ex-Parte Order to 

Continue the Mandatory Scheduling Conference in the above entitled matter and 

represents as follows:

I, ERIC P. ESCAMILLA, hereby apply on behalf of Plaintiff ROSE CARREON 

in the above captioned matter for an ex-parte order, pursuant to LOCAL RULE

240 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 to continue the Mandatory 

Scheduling Conference in the above entitled matter set on October 8, 2015, at 

10:00 a.m. in Department 6 of the above entitled court to a date 

approximately 45 days in the future or as the Court may calendar to the 

convenience of the Court and parties. 

Dated: October 8, 2015 October 7, 2015

 /s/ Eric P. Escamilla 

ERIC P. ESCAMILLA

Attorney for Plaintiff

ROSE CARREON

Case 1:15-cv-01043-DAD-MJS Document 6 Filed 10/08/15 Page 1 of 4
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S EX-PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE – PAGE 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

DECLARATION OF ERIC P. ESCAMILLA IN SUPPORT

OF EX-PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE

MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in all courts in the State of 

California. I am a member of the bar of this Court and the attorney 

of record in this matter for Plaintiff ROSE CARREON.

2. The Complaint in this matter was filed on July 8, 2015.

3. The Mandatory Scheduling Conference in this case is currently set 

for October 8, 2015. 

4. After the Complaint was filed in this matter the Mandatory 

Scheduling Conference was not placed on office calendar. As a result 

of this mis-calendaring there were no calendar ticklers set to 

ensure service of the Defendant time to file an answer make its 

appearance before the Court.

5. Plaintiff is requesting a continuance of 45 days to allow for the 

defendant to be served and files its answer and be prepared to 

participate fully in the scheduling of this case for trial.

6. There have been no previous requests for a continuance of the 

Mandatory Scheduling Conference or other extensions of time or delay 

due to any party in this case.

7. There are no other available or alternative means to address the 

problem that gives rise to this request for a continuance of the 

Mandatory Settlement Conference.

8. There is no significant prejudice to any party or witnesses as a 

result of this request for a continuance.

9. The interests of justice would be best served by a continuance of 

the October 8, 2015, Mandatory Scheduling Conference. 

Case 1:15-cv-01043-DAD-MJS Document 6 Filed 10/08/15 Page 2 of 4
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S EX-PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE – PAGE 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

10. As a result of the facts and circumstances of this case, I am 

requesting a continuance of the Mandatory Scheduling Conference to 

approximately 45 days in the future or to a date to the convenience 

of the Court.

11. The Court has not previously granted any continuances in this 

matter.

12. This matter is a Fair Debt Collection proceeding and is excepted 

by Local Rule 240 from the mandatory scheduling order requirement 

set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b).

13. I will also be out of the country on October 8, 2015, and do not 

return until October 18, 2015, and I would like to personally appear 

and participate in the Mandatory Scheduling Conference in this 

matter.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of 

California that the forgoing is true and correct and that this 

declaration was executed on October 8, 2015, at Fresno, California.

 /s/ Eric P. Escamilla 

ERIC P. ESCAMILLA

Attorney for Plaintiff

ROSE CARREON

Case 1:15-cv-01043-DAD-MJS Document 6 Filed 10/08/15 Page 3 of 4
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S EX-PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE – PAGE 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

I.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

Pursuant to LOCAL RULE 240 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, the 

Court is authorized to control its calendar with respect to calendar with 

respect to status conferences and Mandatory Scheduling Conferences.

DATED: October 7, 2015 LAW OFFICE OF ERIC P. ESCAMILLA

 

/s/ Eric P. Escamilla 

 ERIC P. ESCAMILLA

 Attorney for Plaintiff

 ROSE CARREON

ORDER

Based upon the foregoing and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

The Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set on October 8, 2015, 

is continued to December 11, 2015, at 10:00 AM, in the Yosemite Courthouse 

of the Eastern District Court. The parties may appear telephonically.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 8, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01043-DAD-MJS Document 6 Filed 10/08/15 Page 4 of 4