Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-00747/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-00747-7/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
J.C.
Plaintiff
S.C.
Plaintiff
Jackson Senyonga
Cross-defendant
UAL Corporation
Cross-claimant
United Air Lines, Inc.
Cross-claimant

Document Text:

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

Richard G. Grotch, Esq. - SBN 127713

CODDINGTON, HICKS & DANFORTH

A Professional Corporation, Lawyers

555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 300

Redwood City, California 94065-2133

Tel. (650) 592-5400

Fax. (650) 592-5027

E-mail: rgrotch@chdlawyers.com

ATTORNEYS FOR Defendants/Cross-Claimants

UNITED AIR LINES, INC. and

UAL CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

J.C., an individual, and as Guardian Ad

Litem for her child, S.C., a minor,

Plaintiff,

vs.

UAL CORPORATION, a Delaware

corporation; UNITED AIR LINES. INC..

a subsidiary of UAL CORPORATION and

a Delaware corporation; JACKSON

SENYONGA, an individual; and DOES 1

through 25, inclusive,

Defendants.

/

No. C 09-0747 SBA (JL) (MEJ)

MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE

RELIEF: REQUEST FOR

CONTINUANCE OF STATUS

CONFERENCE AND CLARIFICATION

OF ORDER

Honorable Maria-Elena James

Chief United States Magistrate Judge

AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIM

____________________________________/

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, defendants and cross-complainants UNITED AIR LINES,

INC. and UAL CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to collectively as “United”) respectfully

submit this motion for administrative relief seeking (1) a continuance of the Status Conference re

Settlement, from June 10, 2010 to June 17, 2010 at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom B and (2)

clarification of the Court’s April 29, 2010 order (Doc. 83) with respect to who is required to attend

the Status Conference re Settlement. Counsel for the all of the parties agree to the requested

continuance and to the June 17, 2010 date; plaintiff, herself, has neither agreed nor disagreed.

///

Motion for Administrative Relief – C 09-0747 SBA

Case 4:09-cv-00747-SBA Document 89 Filed 05/25/10 Page 1 of 3
CODDINGTON, HICKS

& DANFORTH

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.

PROCEDURAL POSTURE

On April 29, 2010, upon receipt of the parties’ status conference statements regarding the

settlement of this action, the Court scheduled a status conference for May 13, 2010. (Doc. 83). The

day before the scheduled conference, a request to continue the Status Conference was submitted on

behalf of plaintiff “J.C.” (Doc. 84). Although plaintiffs’ counsel advised that he was available to

attend the conference, the plaintiff, herself, apparently was unable to do so. (Id.)

On May 13, 2010, the Court granted the requested continuance and continued the Status

Conference to June 10, 2010. (Doc. 86). Because of a calendar conflict posed by a long-scheduled

mediation in another case in this Court, involving parties and principals traveling from across the

country, United’s counsel immediately contacted counsel for the other parties to ask if they would

agree to have the Status Conference continued further by one week, to June 17, 2010. Both counsel

for plaintiffs and for defendant Jackson Senyonga agreed to that request.

Because the Status Conference was continued in the first instance because of plaintiff “J.C.’s”

personal inability to attend on the initially scheduled date, United’s counsel has asked plaintiffs’

counsel, repeatedly, to advise whether the plaintiff would also agree to the one week postponement.

Since making that request, plaintiffs’ counsel has confirmed his own availability and agreement to

the continuance, but has indicated that he is unable to confirm whether or not his client will agree.

In order to raise this issue with the Court in a reasonably timely manner, and with no

information apparently forthcoming from the plaintiff herself, United feels compelled to submit this

request at this time.

II.

REQUEST FOR ONE WEEK CONTINUANCE

With the agreement of counsel – if not the plaintiff herself – United respectfully requests that

the Status Conference re Settlement be continued from June 10, 2010 to June 17, 2010, at 10:00

a.m., in Courtroom B of this Court.

///

2

Motion for Administrative Relief – C 09-0747 SBA

Case 4:09-cv-00747-SBA Document 89 Filed 05/25/10 Page 2 of 3
CODDINGTON, HICKS

& DANFORTH

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

III.

REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION

In the Court’s April 29, 2010 order (Doc. 83), the Court ordered “the parties to appear for

a status conference.” (Emphasis added). Counsel for all the defendants interpreted that as requiring

the parties to appear through their counsel of record. It appears plaintiff “J.C.” may have interpreted

the Order as requiring the real parties, themselves, to attend. While it is understandable that the

plaintiff may wish to attend the status conference with her attorney, United simply seeks clarification

as to whether its understanding – that only counsel are required to attend the Status Conference (as

is customary) – is correct.

Dated: May 20, 2010 Respectfully submitted,

CODDINGTON, HICKS & DANFORTH

/s/ Richard G. Grotch

__________________________________

Richard G. Grotch

Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Claimants

United Air Lines, Inc. and UAL Corporation

3

Motion for Administrative Relief – C 09-0747 SBA

Case 4:09-cv-00747-SBA Document 89 Filed 05/25/10 Page 3 of 3