Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00647/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00647-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michelle Bean
Plaintiff
Costco Wholesale Corporation
Defendant

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 

 

1 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

LAW OFFICES OF 

REINER, SLAUGHTER 

& FRANKEL, LLP 

2851 Park Marina Drive, Suite 200 

Post Office Box 494940 

Redding, CA 96049-4940 

(530) 241-1905 

FAX (530) 241-0622 

Russell Reiner, State Bar No. 84461 

Todd E. Slaughter, State Bar No. 87753 

Rick Lundblade, State Bar No. 220662 

April K. Stratte, State Bar No. 290423 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MICHELLE BEAN, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

COSTCO WHOLESALE 

 CORPORATION; 

and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

__________________________________/ 

NO. 2:19-CV-00647-TLN-KJN 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 

MODIFY PROCEEDINGS AS TO 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

Assigned to: District Judge Troy L. Nunley 

Referred to: Magistrate Judge Kendall J. 

Newman 

Complaint filed: October 22, 2018 

Removed: April 16, 2019 

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 

Pursuant to the stipulation of the Parties, and in lieu of Plaintiff filing an affidavit or 

declaration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) for Defendant’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment, Plaintiff MICHELLE BEAN (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), by and through 

her counsel, and Defendant COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION (hereinafter 

“Defendant”), by and through its counsel of record, stipulate as follows: 

/ / / 

Case 2:19-cv-00647-TLN-KJN Document 13 Filed 04/13/20 Page 1 of 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 

 

2 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

I. RECITALS 

1. Whereas Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on or about March 20, 

2020, 

2. Whereas Plaintiff’s Response to the Motion for Summary Judgment would otherwise 

be due on or about April 16, 2020, 

3. Whereas the Defendant has set a hearing on this matter for April 30, 2020, 

4. Whereas COVID-19 has presented unforeseen difficulties in Plaintiff’s ability to 

complete an opposition on or about April 16, 2020, 

5. Whereas there remain facts unavailable to Plaintiff essential to its opposition, 

6. Whereas Parties agree that it is a more efficient use of this court’s time to modify the 

motion schedule instead of requiring Plaintiff to prepare, file, and await the outcome 

of a Rule 56(d) affidavit or declaration, 

7. Whereas the last day to file dispositive motions is June 9, 2020, and 

8. Whereas the Parties agree that the interests of justice require an extension of time to 

allow for Plaintiff to respond to, and Defendant to thereafter file its Reply as to, the 

Motion for Summary Judgment, the Parties stipulate and agree to the following. 

II. STIPULATIONS 

1. The Parties, by and through counsel or record, have met and conferred regarding the 

presently set deadlines related to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. 

2. Good cause exists to modify the currently scheduled dates for the response and reply 

briefs related to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, as the presently 

scheduled April 30, 2020, hearing date. 

3. The Parties seek a continuance regarding the completion of briefing and the hearing 

date regarding the Motion for Summary Judgment. 

4. The Parties would benefit from a continued deadline and no party is or will be 

prejudiced given that trial is not until October 13, 2020 

5. The Parties stipulate that this matter be continued to a hearing date on or about June 

30, 2020, or otherwise in accordance with the Court’s schedule. 

Case 2:19-cv-00647-TLN-KJN Document 13 Filed 04/13/20 Page 2 of 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 

 

3 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

6. The Parties stipulate that the deadlines for Plaintiff’s response brief and Defendant’s 

reply brief will be in accordance with procedural or local rule based on the new 

hearing date. 

7. The Parties stipulate to these modified deadlines as the new guiding dates for the 

Motion for Summary Judgment. 

8. The Parties do not wish at this time to change any other deadlines, Pretrial 

Conference or Trial dates. 

Dated: April 10, 2020 REINER, SLAUGHTER & FRANKEL, LLP 

 By: __/s/RICK LUNDBLADE______________ 

 RICK LUNDBLADE 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Dated: April 10, 2020 MATHENY, SEARS, LINKERT & JAIME, LLP 

 By: __/s/MATTHEW C. JAIME____________ 

 MATTHEW C. JAIME 

 Attorney for Defendant 

Case 2:19-cv-00647-TLN-KJN Document 13 Filed 04/13/20 Page 3 of 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 

 

4 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

 ORDER 

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court hereby approves this Stipulation and 

orders as follows: 

1. The hearing on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, presently set for 

April 30, 2020, is continued to July 9, 2020, at 2:00 p.m. 

2. Response and Reply briefing due dates will be in accordance with the new 

hearing date. 

3. All other deadlines, the Pretrial Conference and Trial dates remain in accordance 

with prior scheduling orders or stipulations. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 10, 2020 

Case 2:19-cv-00647-TLN-KJN Document 13 Filed 04/13/20 Page 4 of 4