Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06599/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06599-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Canandaigua Wine Co
Plaintiff
Edwin Moldauer
Defendant

Document Text:

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SHOW CAUSE HEARING AND SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE -- CASE NO: CIV-F-02-6599 OWW 

228961.1

Page 1

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

ROGERS JOSEPH O’DONNELL & PHILLIPS 

PAUL M. ZIEFF (State Bar No. 100520) 

MARK A. KAHN (State Bar No. 214339) 

311 California Street 

San Francisco, California 94104 

Telephone: 415.956.2828 

Facsimile: 415.956.6457 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

CANANDAIGUA WINE COMPANY, 

INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CANANDAIGUA WINE COMPANY, 

INC., 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

EDWIN MOLDAUER,, 

Defendant. 

Case No. CIV-F-02-6599 OWW DLB 

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE SHOW 

CAUSE HEARING AND SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE 

 

Date: July 19, 2005 

Time: 8:30 a.m. 

Courtroom: Two 

Judge: Hon. Oliver W. Wanger 

The parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

1. Edwin Moldauer (“Moldauer”) and Canandaigua Wine Company, Inc. 

("Canandaigua") have agreed to continue the Show Cause hearing on Canandaigua's motion 

for a preliminary injunction and further, have agreed that the terms, conditions and directives 

of the Court’s December 19, 2002 and January 6, 2003 Orders (the “Orders”) are to remain in 

effect until the Show Cause Hearing is held. 

2. On or about April 24, 2003, Moldauer filed a whistleblower complaint 

under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act with the United States Department of Labor. (Section 806 of 

the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1514A). In 

the Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower action, Moldauer asserts that his employment at 

Canandaigua’s Mission Bell Winery was terminated in retaliation for his identification 

Case 1:02-cv-06599-OWW -DLB Document 37 Filed 07/12/05 Page 1 of 3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SHOW CAUSE HEARING AND SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE -- CASE NO: CIV-F-02-6599 OWW 

228961.1

Page 2

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

of alleged accounting irregularities. On November 14, 2003, an Administrative Law Judge 

dismissed Moldauer’s whistle-blower complaint as untimely pursuant to Canandaigua’s 

Motion For Summary Decision. Moldauer is currently prosecuting an appeal from the ALJ’s 

decision. The appeal has been fully briefed and the parties are now awaiting a decision from 

the Administrative Review Board of the Department of Labor. Moldauer’s attorney in this 

action – Jacob Weisberg – does not represent Moldauer in any of the other pending 

proceedings. 

3. The parties hereto desire to hold matters in this proceeding in abeyance 

until the Department of Labor, Administrative Review Board, rules on Moldauer’s pending 

appeal of the dismissal of his Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower claim. 

4. A Mandatory Scheduling Conference is currently set in this matter for 

July 19, 2005, at 8:30 a.m.. The parties propose and agree to reschedule the Mandatory 

Scheduling Conference to February 2, 2006 at 8:30 a.m. with the hope that by that time the 

Administrative Review Board will have ruled on Moldauer’s appeal of the dismissal of his 

Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower claim. The parties propose and agree that if 

circumstances change or warrant, they may request that the Court advance the date of the 

Mandatory Scheduling Conference either by stipulation or motion. The parties propose and 

agree to advise the Court in their Joint Scheduling Report as to whether they believe it will be 

necessary to proceed with the Show Cause Hearing; and in the event that it will be necessary 

to do so, to propose a date and briefing schedule for the Show Cause Hearing. 

5. By agreeing to have the terms, conditions and directives of the Orders 

remain in effect until the rescheduled Show Cause Hearing, Moldauer does not waive, and 

hereby expressly reserves, whatever rights he may have, if any, to assert the 5th Amendment 

privilege against self incrimination in connection with, or in response to, any of such terms, 

conditions and directives. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 1:02-cv-06599-OWW -DLB Document 37 Filed 07/12/05 Page 2 of 3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE SHOW CAUSE HEARING AND SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE -- CASE NO: CIV-F-02-6599 OWW 

228961.1

Page 3

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. By entering into this stipulation, Canandaigua does not concede that 

Moldauer does have a valid 5th Amendment privilege claim with respect to the terms, 

conditions and directives of the Orders. 

Dated: July __, 2005 ROGERS JOSEPH O’DONNELL & PHILLIPS 

 /s/ 

By: ________________________________________ 

PAUL M. ZIEFF, Attorneys for Plaintiff, 

CANANDAIGUA WINE COMPANY, INC. 

Dated: July __, 2005 LAW OFFICE OF JACOB M. WEISBERG 

 /s/ 

By: _________________________________________ 

JACOB M. WEISBERG, Attorneys for 

Defendant, EDWIN MOLDAUER 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: __July 11, 2005 /s/ OLIVER W. WANGER_____________ 

HONORABLE OLIVER W. WANGER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

Case 1:02-cv-06599-OWW -DLB Document 37 Filed 07/12/05 Page 3 of 3