Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01655/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01655-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Eastern Plumas Health Care
Defendant
Eastern Plumas Health Care Foundation, Inc.
Defendant
Ritchard Molina
Plaintiff

Document Text:

ROBERT H. ZIMMERMAN, Bar No. 84345

THEODORE D. POPPINGA, Bar No. 133420

SCHUERING ZIMMERMAN & DOYLE, LLP

400 University Avenue

Sacramento, California 95825-6502

(916) 567-0400

FAX: 568-0400

Attorneys for Defendant EASTERN PLUMAS HEALTHCARE DISTRICT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RITCHARD MOLINA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

EASTERN PLUMAS HEALTH CARE, an 

unknown business entity, EASTERN 

PLUMAS HEALTH CARE 

FOUNDATION, INC., a California 

corporation,

Defendants. ______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

_ )

Case No. 2:11-cv-01655-MCE- DAD

STIPULATION FOR 

CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT 

AND REQUEST FOR ORDER 

VACATING PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING ORDER

Trial: 9/8/15

Pretrial Conf.: 7/30/15

This case was mediated before The Honorable Fred K. Morrison at the offices 

of JAMS on June 9, 2015. On June 17, 2015, the parties submitted a signed 

stipulation (ECF No. 29) that states:

1. That a provisional settlement has been reached between the parties, 

conditioned only upon plaintiff’s counsel successfully negotiating the reduction of an 

outstanding lien; 

2. That the parties expect that this matter will be able to be resolved 

Case 2:11-cv-01655-MCE-DAD Document 30 Filed 06/19/15 Page 1 of 2
STIPULATION FOR CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT AND REQUEST

FOR ORDER VACATING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

-2-

within approximately forty-five days;

3. That the parties therefore request that the current trial date and other 

pre-trial dates be vacated and that an Order to Show Cause or other “control date” 

be set for approximately forty-five days hence;

4. That this stipulation is not entered into for the purpose of delay but 

because the parties believe the opportunity exists to resolve this action without 

further formality that will best serve the interests of justice and judicial economy;

5. That in the unlikely event the provision referenced above cannot be 

satisfied, the parties will, within two weeks of execution of this document, notify the 

Court and request an amended scheduling order continuing the current trial date of 

September 8, 2015, and setting forth new pretrial deadlines.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 18, 2015

Case 2:11-cv-01655-MCE-DAD Document 30 Filed 06/19/15 Page 2 of 2