Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00561/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00561-0/pdf.json

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

---

{6058/047/00639073.DOCX} 1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BINDING ARBITRATION

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

WANGER JONES HELSLEY PC

265 E. River Park Circle, Suite 310

Fresno, California 93720

Telephone: (559) 233-4800

Facsimile: (559) 233-9330

Timothy Jones #119841

Michael S. Helsley #199103

Jena M. Harlos #276420

Attorneys for: Defendant, Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID SANDOVAL MERCADO, an 

individual; and WILLIAM CHENOWETH, an 

individual,

Plaintiffs,

v.

HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC., a 

Delaware corporation

Defendant.

Case No. 1:16-cv-00561-LJO-JLT

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS 

PENDING BINDING ARBITRATION

(Doc. 10)

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs David Sandoval Mercado and William Chenoweth (collectively, 

“Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint in this action on April 20, 2016, against Defendant Halliburton Energy 

Services, Inc. (“Defendant”); 

WHEREAS, the claims alleged by Plaintiffs in their Complaint arise out of their 

employment relationship with Defendant;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs agreed as a term and condition of their employment that all 

claims arising out of their employment relationship with Defendant must be submitted to binding 

arbitration in accordance with the terms of the Halliburton Company Dispute Resolution Program 

(“Halliburton DRP”);

Case 1:16-cv-00561-LJO-JLT Document 11 Filed 07/19/16 Page 1 of 4
{6058/047/00639073.DOCX} 2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BINDING ARBITRATION

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

WHEREAS, on June 16, 2016, Plaintiff Chenoweth submitted a Demand for 

Arbitration to JAMS, Defendant responded on July 7, 2016, and an arbitrator was appointed on July 

12, 2016, and a telephone conference to set an arbitration date is set for July 25, 2016;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Mercado agrees all of his claims in this litigation are subject to 

binding arbitration in accordance with the Halliburton DRP and will submit a Demand for Arbitration 

to either JAMS or AAA on or before August 1, 2016;

WHEREAS, prior to binding arbitration, the Parties may elect to voluntarily attend 

mediation; and

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that proceedings in this Court shall be stayed pending the 

completion of mediation and/or binding arbitration. The Parties further agree that this Court shall 

retain jurisdiction to confirm the arbitration award, if any, and to enter judgment, if any, for the 

purposes of enforcement.

STIPULATION

Plaintiffs and Defendant, by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate as 

follows:

1. All claims asserted by Plaintiff Chenoweth in this litigation will be resolved in 

the JAMS arbitration proceeding he initiated with his Demand for Arbitration dated June 16, 2016; 

2. Plaintiff Mercado will submit all of his claims in this litigation to binding 

arbitration pursuant to the terms of the Halliburton DRP;

3. Plaintiff Mercado will make a Demand for Arbitration to either JAMS or AAA 

prior to August 1, 2016;

4. The Parties may elect to voluntarily attend mediation prior to binding 

arbitration;

5. All proceedings in this Court shall be stayed to allow the completion of 

mediation and if necessary, binding arbitration; and 

///

///

///

Case 1:16-cv-00561-LJO-JLT Document 11 Filed 07/19/16 Page 2 of 4
{6058/047/00639073.DOCX} 3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BINDING ARBITRATION

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

6. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to confirm the arbitration award, if any, and 

enter judgment, if any, for the purposes of enforcement. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

DATED: July 19, 2016 WANGER JONES HELSLEY PC

By /s/ Jena M. Harlos 

Michael S. Helsley

Jena M. Graykowski, 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. 

DATED: July 19, 2016 LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL TRACY

By /s/ Michael L. Tracy

Michael L. Tracy

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

David Sandovla Mercado and William Chenoweth

Filer’s Attestation-Local Rule 131(e)

The filing attorney attests that she has obtained concurrence regarding the filing of this 

document and its content from the signatories to this document.

Case 1:16-cv-00561-LJO-JLT Document 11 Filed 07/19/16 Page 3 of 4
{6058/047/00639073.DOCX} 4

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BINDING ARBITRATION

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

1. The stipulation of the parties to remand this matter to arbitration is GRANTED;

2. The Scheduling Conference set for July 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. is vacated;

3. The matter is STAYED1to allow the completion of the arbitration; and

4. Every 120 days and no later than 30 days after the issuance of the arbitrator’s decision, 

counsel SHALL file a joint status report; and

5. The Court retains jurisdiction to confirm the arbitration award and enter judgment for 

purposes of enforcement. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 19, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

1 The FAA provides, “If any suit or proceeding be brought in any of the courts of the United States upon any issue 

referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing for such arbitration, the court in which such suit is pending, upon 

being satisfied that the issue involved in such suit or proceeding is referable to arbitration under such an agreement, shall 

on application of one of the parties stay the trial of the action until such arbitration has been had in accordance with the 

terms of the agreement . . .” 9 U.S.C § 3. 

Case 1:16-cv-00561-LJO-JLT Document 11 Filed 07/19/16 Page 4 of 4