STIPULATION AND SECOND AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER

STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiffs Thomas T. Hawker, John J. Incandela, Dave Kraechan, Edwin Jay Lee and Edward J. Rocha (collectively "Insureds"), plaintiff by assignment the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver for County Bank (the "FDIC"), and Defendant BancInsure, Inc. ("BancInsure"), through their respective counsel of record, as follows:

1. This Court initially issued an Amended Scheduling Order (Docket no. 37) following a May 28, 2013 Scheduling Conference.

2. After the parties met-and-conferred regarding the most efficient and economic ways to manage this litigation, they submitted a stipulation to the Court requesting an Amended Scheduling Order. On August 29, 2013, this Court issued an Amended Scheduling Order (Docket No. 50) setting new dates and deadlines.

3. The parties have diligently pursued discovery related to the coverage issues since the issuance of the Amended Scheduling Order. The parties will have taken nine (9) depositions in this case by November 19, 2013, will have served and responded to over a half-dozen sets of written discovery, and served approximately ten subpoenas.

4. Despite these diligent efforts, the parties believe that additional time is needed to resolve discovery disputes between the parties and permit additional discovery before the deadline for filing cross-motions for summary judgment. Accordingly, the parties agree that good cause exists to adopt a Second Amended Scheduling Order such that 1) certain contract interpretation issues may still be addressed early in the litigation and prior to the resolution of other issues that could either be rendered moot or otherwise impacted by the early resolution of coverage issues, and so that 2) that all discovery related to the contract interpretation issue may be completed before cross summary-judgment motions are completely briefed before this Court.

5. The parties reiterate that an early resolution of the contract interpretation issues could substantially reduce costs and simplify the remaining issues to be resolved in the litigation irrespective of which party prevails on cross-summary-judgment motions planned at the completion of "Phase I" as described below. Thus, if the Insureds and the FDIC prevail against coverage defenses raised in response to the Second Count for Breach of Contract, Count IV for Reformation would potentially become moot as would defenses raised by BancInsure to such claims such as estoppel and statute of limitations. If BancInsure prevails as to coverage defenses raised in Response to Count II, Count III for Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing would potentially become moot.

6. The parties stipulate to and respectfully request that the Court issue a Second Amended Scheduling Order that amends the following dates and deadlines in this matter:

7. The parties stipulate that the trial date will remain October 6, 2014.

8. The parties further stipulate and agree to engage in a formal alternative dispute resolution process, to be completed within 90 days of the Court's ruling on the Phase I motions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.