Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Acosta v. Gill, 1:17-cv-00262-LJO-SKO. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180205950 Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 02, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 02, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER (Doc. 32) SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, Jose Acosta ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants, Nirmal Singh Gill dba Arco Gas & Food Mart, Navdeep Singh dba Arco Gas & Food Mart, Melvin C. Armey, and Carol L. Gano ("Defendants," and together with Plaintiff, "the Parties"), together request that the Court amend the current deadlines set by this Court's Scheduling Order, dated September 8, 2017 (Dkt. 21) ("Scheduling Order") as follows: WH
More

STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER

(Doc. 32)

Plaintiff, Jose Acosta ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants, Nirmal Singh Gill dba Arco Gas & Food Mart, Navdeep Singh dba Arco Gas & Food Mart, Melvin C. Armey, and Carol L. Gano ("Defendants," and together with Plaintiff, "the Parties"), together request that the Court amend the current deadlines set by this Court's Scheduling Order, dated September 8, 2017 (Dkt. 21) ("Scheduling Order") as follows:

WHEREAS, counsel for Defendants is in the process of withdrawing as counsel and as such there has been a delay in Defendants' responding to written discovery;

WHEREAS, the Parties had previously been discussing settlement and, given the withdrawal of defense counsel, are unsure where Defendants stand on the issue at this time but are hopeful that a settlement can be reached at the settlement conference which is set for February 9, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.;

WHEREAS, to allow the Parties an opportunity to resolve the issues regarding discovery, and to work toward an ultimate resolution of the case, Court has ordered the Parties to file a joint stipulation to continue discovery deadlines by not more than 30 days (Dkt. 30);

WHEREAS, continuing the discovery deadlines will also necessitate continuing the motion filing deadlines, particularly for dispositive motions which cannot be drafted until expert discovery has been completed, and the current April 25, 2018 deadline for filing dispositive motions conflicts with the new expert disclosure and expert discovery cutoff dates;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES, THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL, HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE to amend the Scheduling Order as follows:

Event Current Date New Date Non-expert discovery cutoff March 2, 2018 March 30, 2018 Expert discovery cutoff April 13, 2018 May 11, 2018 Expert disclosures March 9, 2018 April 6, 2018 Rebuttal expert disclosures March 23, 2018 April 20, 2018 Non-dispositive motion filing April 13, 2018 May 11, 2018 deadline Non-dispositive motion May 16, 2018 June 13, 2018 hearing deadline Dispositive motion filing April 25, 2018 May 23, 2018 deadline Dispositive motion hearing June 6, 2018 July 11, 2018 deadline

All other requirements set forth in the Scheduling Order relating to the above shall remain unchanged, including the pre-trial and trial dates.

ORDER

Based on the parties' above-Stipulation to modify the Court's Scheduling Order (Doc. 32), and good cause appearing pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4), the Court hereby GRANTS the Stipulation and modifies its September 8, 2017, Scheduling Order (Doc. 21) as follows:1

Event Current Date New Date Non-expert discovery cutoff March 2, 2018 March 30, 2018 Expert discovery cutoff April 13, 2018 May 11, 2018 Expert disclosures March 9, 2018 April 6, 2018 Rebuttal expert disclosures March 23, 2018 April 20, 2018 Non-dispositive motion filing April 13, 2018 April 25, 2018 deadline Non-dispositive motion May 16, 2018 May 23, 2018 hearing deadline Dispositive motion filing April 25, 2018 unchanged deadline Dispositive motion hearing June 6, 2018 unchanged deadline

All other requirements set forth in the Scheduling Order relating to the above remain unchanged, including the pre-trial and trial dates.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Several of the dates proposed by the parties have been adjusted to allow the Court adequate time to rule on non-dispositive and dispositive motions, and to permit the parties sufficient time to prepare their pretrial submissions and to prepare for trial.
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