Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

HIGH TEK USA, INC. v. HEAT AND CONTROL, INC., 3:12-cv-805-WHO. (2013)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20131108a50 Visitors: 2
Filed: Nov. 07, 2013
Latest Update: Nov. 07, 2013
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2 AND ORDER WILLIAM H. ORRICK, District Judge. Pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rule 6-2, plaintiff High Tek USA, Inc. ("High Tek") and defendant Heat and Control, Inc. ("Heat and Control") jointly submit this Stipulated Request for Changing Time and hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, on April 9, 2013, the Court entered the Scheduling Order setting the last day for fact discovery as October 11, 2013. [Dock
More

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING TIME PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2 AND ORDER

WILLIAM H. ORRICK, District Judge.

Pursuant to Northern District of California Local Rule 6-2, plaintiff High Tek USA, Inc. ("High Tek") and defendant Heat and Control, Inc. ("Heat and Control") jointly submit this Stipulated Request for Changing Time and hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, on April 9, 2013, the Court entered the Scheduling Order setting the last day for fact discovery as October 11, 2013. [Docket No. 57]

WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 37-3, the deadline to file a motion to compel further fact discovery is Friday, October 18.

WHEREAS, on October 1, 2013, Heat and Control took the deposition of High Tek pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6). High Tek's deponent was unable to answer certain questions during that deposition on topics for which the deposition had been noticed.

WHEREAS, on October 15, Heat and Control and High Tek's counsel met and conferred via telephone regarding Heat and Control's request that High Tek produce a witness prepared to fully answer questions falling under Topics Nos. 12, 13 and 14 of the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice directed to High Tek.

WHEREAS, High Tek proposed that in lieu of a further deposition it provide written answers to the questions at issue by October 23, 2013.

WHEREAS, Heat and Control agreed to the proposal, subject to the right to bring a motion to compel by November 1, 2013, after the deadline set by Local Rule 37-3 if it determines that High Tek's written responses are insufficient.

WHEREAS, the Court granted the parties' stipulation that High Tek provide written answers by October 23, 2013 and extending the motion to compel deadline to November 1, 2013. [Docket No. 66]

WHEREAS, High Tek subsequently requested until November 4, 2013 to provide full written answers.

WHEREAS, the Court granted the parties' stipulation that High Tek provide written answers by November 4, 2013 and extending the motion to compel deadline to November 6, 2013. [Docket No. 67]

WHEREAS, High Tek has agreed to a further deposition of Jay Brown on topics 12-14 of Heat and Control's Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice by November 18, 2013.

WHEREAS, the proposed deposition date will not impact any other date or deadline set by the Scheduling Order or by Local Rule.

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED and AGREED, and the parties ask the Court to adopt as its order the following:

STIPULATION

High Tek shall produce Jay Brown to testify on topics 12-14 of Heat and Control's Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice on or before November 18, 2013 (and on November 14, 2013 if he is available that date) in Sacramento.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

I, Russell Cohen, am the ECF User whose User ID and password are being used to file this Stipulation. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that the above-listed signatories have concurred in this filing.

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, 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