Morgan v. Rohr, Inc.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NATHANIEL MORGAN, et al., Case No.: 20cv574-GPC (AHG) 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER ON JOINT STIPULATION TO v. CONTINUE DECEMBER 10, 2024 SETTLEMENT DISPOSITION CONFERENCE ROHR, INC., et al., [ECF NO. 321] 15 Defendants.

18 Pending before the Court is the parties’ “Joint Stipulation to Continue December 10, 2024 Settlement Disposition Conference.” (ECF No. 321 (“Joint Motion”).) In support of their third request, the parties report that they are continuing to meet and confer on finalizing the long-form settlement agreement, particularly in light of the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel’s decision in Hudson v. Libre Technology Inc., No. 18cv1371, 2019 WL 5963648, at *9 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2019). (Id. at 1.) The Court notes that the parties belatedly made this request, since they filed this Joint Motion on the day the // // // || motion for preliminary approval of class settlement was due.* Moving forward, if the || parties need further continuances for the Settlement Disposition Conference (“SDC”) 3 related deadlines, they must comply with Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg’s Civil ||Chambers Rule V. Nonetheless, the Court finds good cause here and GRANTS the Joint || Motion as follows: 6 The SDC currently scheduled for December 10, 2024, at 1:30 p.m. is CONTINUED 7 February 10, 2025, at 1:30 p.m. If the parties file the motion for preliminary approval || of class settlement on or before February 3, 2025, the SDC will be VACATED without || further court order.’ If the parties fail to file the motion for preliminary approval of || class settlement by the deadline, or if counsel of record or any unrepresented party fails || to appear at the SDC, the Court will issue an order to show cause why sanctions should 12 be imposed for failing to comply with this Order.

13 IT IS SO ORDERED.

14 || Dated: December 4, 2024 —> □□ 15 : 16 Honorable Michael S. Berg United States Magistrate Judge 1 Although this Joint Motion was filed as a stipulation, the United States District Court, Southern District of California’s Local Rules state that such stipulations are not enforceable until the Court || approves. See CivLR 7.2.

A proposed order granting the joint motion must be e-mailed to the assigned district judge’s || chambers on the same day. The proposed order must be e-mailed pursuant to section 2(h) of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California’s Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, available at www.casd.uscourts.gov.