Filed: Jul. 22, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 22, 2014
Summary: PLAINTIFF JAMES D. HASS AND DEFENDANT COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO'S STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO MODIFY THE STATUS (PRE-TRIAL-SCHEDULING ORDER) JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge. Plaintiff JAMES HASS and Defendant COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO (erroneously sued as SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SUPPORT SERVICES) hereby respectfully request the Court modify the Status (Pre-trial Scheduling) Order for the reasons set forth below. Defendants removed the case to this Court on August 22, 2013. Since the removal was f
Summary: PLAINTIFF JAMES D. HASS AND DEFENDANT COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO'S STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO MODIFY THE STATUS (PRE-TRIAL-SCHEDULING ORDER) JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge. Plaintiff JAMES HASS and Defendant COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO (erroneously sued as SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SUPPORT SERVICES) hereby respectfully request the Court modify the Status (Pre-trial Scheduling) Order for the reasons set forth below. Defendants removed the case to this Court on August 22, 2013. Since the removal was fi..
More
PLAINTIFF JAMES D. HASS AND DEFENDANT COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO'S STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO MODIFY THE STATUS (PRE-TRIAL-SCHEDULING ORDER)
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
Plaintiff JAMES HASS and Defendant COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO (erroneously sued as SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SUPPORT SERVICES) hereby respectfully request the Court modify the Status (Pre-trial Scheduling) Order for the reasons set forth below.
Defendants removed the case to this Court on August 22, 2013. Since the removal was filed, Defendant COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO has filed Motions to Dismiss the initial Complaint, the First Amended Complaint, and, now, the Second Amended Complaint. Defendant COUNTY's first two motions were granted with leave to amend. The hearing on Defendant's Motion To Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint is set for August 20, 2014. If Defendant COUNTY's motion is successful and the Court does not grant leave to amend, then the case will be concluded as it pertains to Defendant COUNTY.
Because of the above and the fact the pleadings are not yet in order, the parties have not yet engaged in any discovery so as to avoid incurring needless time and expense conducting discovery on claims that cannot survive a motion to dismiss. Since expert disclosures are due in this case on August 15, 2014, discovery is set to close on October 15, 2014, and it is unlikely the parties will have a resolution of the currently pending Motion to Dismiss prior to September 2014, the parties stipulate to modify the present scheduling order and respectfully request that the scheduling order be modified as follows:
Expert Disclosure: July 10, 2015
Rebuttal Expert Disclosure: August 14, 2015
Discovery Cutoff: October 14, 2015
Last Day to File Dispositive Motions: November 18, 2015
Hearing on dispositive motions: December 16, 2015 at 9:30 a.m.
Joint pretrial statement due: February 5, 2016
Pre-Trial Conference: February 12, 2016 at 10:00 a.m.
Trial: March 28, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
ORDER
Based on the Stipulation of the parties, the current scheduling order is modified as set forth above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
