Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Montez v. City of Stockton, 2:10-cv-03149-MCE-EFB. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160517753 Visitors: 11
Filed: May 12, 2016
Latest Update: May 12, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE OF PRETRAIL SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINE MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Plaintiffs, through their attorneys of record, James Cook and Ben Nisenbaum, Law Offices of John Burris; and Defendants, City of Stockton, et al., by and through attorneys of record, Ted Wood, Office of the City Attorney, that the following deadlines be continued: Discovery Completion: July 18, 2016 (Prior date was June 1, 2016)
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE OF PRETRAIL SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINE

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Plaintiffs, through their attorneys of record, James Cook and Ben Nisenbaum, Law Offices of John Burris; and Defendants, City of Stockton, et al., by and through attorneys of record, Ted Wood, Office of the City Attorney, that the following deadlines be continued:

Discovery Completion: July 18, 2016 (Prior date was June 1, 2016)

All other dates remain as set forth in the Court's Second Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order (Document 23), and as amended by the Stipulation and Order for Continuance of Pretrial Scheduling Order Deadlines (Document 35).

The brief continuance is requested to permit Plaintiffs and defendants to address outstanding discovery issues brought about the difficulty in client contact among Plaintiffs and their counsel. The parties respectfully request the Court grant this stipulation to allow them adequate time to prepare the case for trial.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

ORDER

In accordance with the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing, the deadline for the completion of discovery specified above is continued with the foregoing request. All other dates and deadlines set forth in the Court's the Court's Second Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order (Document 23), and as amended by the Stipulation and Order for Continuance of Pretrial Scheduling Order Deadlines (Document 35) remain in full force and effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer