Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04723/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04723-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
California Cable & Telecommunications Association
Cross-claimant
City Council of the City of Walnut Creek
Counter-defendant
City of Walnut Creek
Counter-defendant
Pacific Bell Telephone Company
Counter-defendant
SBC California
Plaintiff

Document Text:

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE ADR PROCESS AND DEADLINES - 1 - CASE NO. C-05-4723 (MMC) 

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

KIRK E. TROST (State Bar # 127097) 

MADELINE E. MILLER (State Bar # 221568) 

MILLER, OWEN & TROST 

A Professional Corporation 

428 J Street, Suite 400 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Telephone: (916) 447-7933 

Facsimile: (916) 447-5195 

THOMAS HAAS, City Attorney (State Bar # 045279) 

PAUL VALLE-RIESTRA, Senior Assistant City Attorney (State Bar # 119321) 

MARGARET L. KOTZEBUE, Assistant City Attorney (State Bar # 148592) 

City of Walnut Creek 

P.O. Box 8039 

1666 North Main Street 

Walnut Creek, CA 94596 

Telephone: (925) 943-5813 

Facsimile: (925) 256-3501 

Attorneys for Defendants and Respondents 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, a 

California Corporation, doing business as SBC 

CALIFORNIA,

 Plaintiffs and Petitioner, 

 v. 

THE CITY OF WALNUT CREEK, 

CALIFORNIA, and THE CITY COUNCIL 

OF THE CITY OF WALNUT CREEK 

 Defendants and Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 05-4723 MMC 

STIPULATION AND [Proposed] 

ORDER VACATING ENE 

ASSIGNMENT AND CONTINUING 

ADR PROCESS AND DEADLINES 

Case 3:05-cv-04723-MMC Document 85 Filed 08/03/06 Page 1 of 3
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE ADR PROCESS AND DEADLINES - 2 - CASE NO. C-05-4723 (MMC) 

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

The parties to this action hereby stipulate as follows: 

WHEREAS, Defendants City of Walnut Creek and its City Council have made a motion to 

dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (and Defendant in Intervention California Cable & 

Telecommunications Association has answered said First Amended Complaint); 

WHEREAS, legislation is pending at the state level that may affect the issues presented in 

this litigation;

WHEREAS, in order to allow the completion of the legislative process and assess its effect 

on the issues in this case, the parties have stipulated, pursuant to Local Rule 7-7(b)(1) and 6-1(a), 

to continue the hearing date on Defendants’ motion to dismiss to October 13, 2006, which is the 

same day as the further Case Management Conference previously set by the Court in this action;

WHEREAS, the Court ordered this case into the Early Neutral Evaluation (“ENE”) 

program by minute order dated May 26, 2006, and under Local ADR Rule 3-6 the ENE is to be 

completed by August 24, 2006; and 

WHEREAS, the parties believe it would not be an effective expenditure of the Court’s, the 

volunteer evaluator’s, or the parties’ time and resources to conduct an ENE until after the 

legislative session has ended and the effects of the pending legislation have been assessed by the 

parties,

THEREFORE, IT HEREBY IS STIPULATED by and among the parties to the abovecaptioned action, through their respective counsel of record, and the parties respectfully request 

that the Court enter its Order, as follows: 

1. The assignment of this action to the Early Neutral Evaluation Program is VACATED. 

2. The parties shall address in their Joint Case Management Conference Statement, and 

shall be prepared to address at the Case Management Conference set for October 13, 2006, the 

appropriate Alternative Dispute Resolution process for this case in light of the effects of any 

legislation enacted by the time of the Case Management Conference. 

//

//

//

Case 3:05-cv-04723-MMC Document 85 Filed 08/03/06 Page 2 of 3
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE ADR PROCESS AND DEADLINES - 3 - CASE NO. C-05-4723 (MMC) 

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: August 2, 2006 MILLER, OWEN & TROST 

 A Professional Corporation 

 By: s/Kirk E. Trost 

 Kirk E. Trost 

 Attorneys for Defendants and Respondents 

City of Walnut Creek and the City Council of the 

 City of Walnut Creek 

DATED: August 2, 2006 PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP 

 By: s/Ronald E. Van Buskirk 

 Ronald E. Van Buskirk 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Petitioner Pacific Bell 

 Telephone Company, a California Corporation, 

 doing business as SBC California 

DATED: August 2, 2006 HOWARD RICE NEMEROVSKI CANADY 

FALK AND RABKIN 

A Professional Corporation 

JEFFREY SINSHEIMER 

CALIFORNIA CABLE & 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION 

 By: s/Bernard A. Burk 

 Bernard A. Burk 

 Attorneys for Intervenor California Cable and 

 Telecommunications Association 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: ___________________ 

 Maxine M. Chesney 

 United States District Judge 

August 3, 2006

Case 3:05-cv-04723-MMC Document 85 Filed 08/03/06 Page 3 of 3