FLOWERS v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, 2:11-cv-00185 KJN PS. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20120620969
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 18, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2012
Summary: ORDER KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. Presently before the court is the parties' Joint Stipulation and Order (Dkt. No. 29), which requests the following relief: (1) a settlement conference before a judge of this court; and (2) modification of the expert disclosure deadlines in the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order, in order to accommodate the settlement conference. 1 For good cause shown, the court approves the stipulation. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The parties' Joint
Summary: ORDER KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. Presently before the court is the parties' Joint Stipulation and Order (Dkt. No. 29), which requests the following relief: (1) a settlement conference before a judge of this court; and (2) modification of the expert disclosure deadlines in the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order, in order to accommodate the settlement conference. 1 For good cause shown, the court approves the stipulation. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The parties' Joint ..
More
ORDER
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
Presently before the court is the parties' Joint Stipulation and Order (Dkt. No. 29), which requests the following relief: (1) a settlement conference before a judge of this court; and (2) modification of the expert disclosure deadlines in the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order, in order to accommodate the settlement conference.1 For good cause shown, the court approves the stipulation.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The parties' Joint Stipulation and Order (Dkt. No. 29) is approved.
2. The parties shall arrange the scheduling of the settlement conference with the undersigned's Courtroom Deputy, who can be reached at (916) 930-4187.
3. The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order (Dkt. No. 25) is modified such that: (a) both parties' initial expert disclosures shall be made no later than September 7, 2012; and (b) rebuttal expert disclosures, if any, shall be made on or before October 12, 2012. The rest of the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order remains effective.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. This case proceeds before the undersigned as a result of the parties' consent to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. (Order, May 22, 2012, Dkt. No. 26.)
Source: Leagle
