Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Kenny v. Pacific Investment Management Company LLC, CV 14-1987-RSM. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20180508e13 Visitors: 18
Filed: May 07, 2018
Latest Update: May 07, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES RICARDO S. MARTINEZ , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Robert Kenny ("Plaintiff") and Defendants Pacific Investment Management Company LLC and PIMCO Investments LLC (collectively, "Defendants"), through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: The operative scheduling order sets the date for filing the agreed Pretrial Order as May 18, 2018 and the trial date as June 18, 2018. Stipulation
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES

Plaintiff Robert Kenny ("Plaintiff") and Defendants Pacific Investment Management Company LLC and PIMCO Investments LLC (collectively, "Defendants"), through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

The operative scheduling order sets the date for filing the agreed Pretrial Order as May 18, 2018 and the trial date as June 18, 2018. Stipulation and Order Amending Order Setting Trial Date and Related Dates, ECF No. 124. Under the Local Rules of the Western District of Washington ("LCR"), the deadline for Plaintiff to serve his Pretrial Statement was April 18, 2018, which was 30 days prior to the deadline to file the agreed Pretrial Order. LCR 16(h). The deadline for Defendants to serve their Pretrial Statement was April 27, 2018. LCR 16(i). Plaintiff, through inadvertence, did not serve his Pretrial Statement until April 30, 2018, just one business day after Defendants served their Pretrial Statement and notified Plaintiff of his oversight on April 27th. Plaintiff provided a Pretrial Statement and Draft Joint Pretrial Order in an attempt to alleviate some of the prejudice Defendants might claim. Nevertheless, Plaintiff acknowledges that his Pretrial Statement was inadvertently served twelve days after the deadline.

In light of the prejudice that Defendants would experience in meeting the current pretrial deadlines due to Plaintiff's delayed service of his Pretrial Statement, the parties agree that (1) there is good cause to continue the trial date, and corresponding pretrial deadlines, and (2) such a continuance will remedy the prejudice caused to Defendants by Plaintiff's delayed service of his Pretrial Statement. Plaintiff agrees that, should the Court determine that the trial date and corresponding pretrial deadlines should not be continued, Defendants have reserved their right to seek other remedies or sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c) and LCR 11(c) for plaintiff's failure to satisfy his pretrial obligations. See LCR 16(m)(1).

Based on the foregoing, the parties respectfully request that the trial be continued to a date at the Court's convenience after July 30, 2018; that the deadline for filing the agreed Pretrial Order be continued to 30 days before the new trial date; and that all other pretrial deadlines be modified accordingly.

ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation by the parties, and for good cause shown, the trial date and pretrial deadlines in this action are modified as follows:

Event in Order Setting Current Deadline Revised Deadline Trial Date and Related Dates All motions in limine must be 05/18/2018 9/11/2018 filed by and noted on the motion calendar no later than the THIRD Friday thereafter Agreed pretrial order due 05/18/2018 9/27/2018 Trial briefs, proposed voir 06/01/2018 10/4/2018 dire questions, jury instructions, neutral statement of the case, and trial exhibits due Trial date 06/18/2018 10/9/2018

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