Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH v. CITY OF VACAVILLE, 2:17-cv-00524-KJM-KJN. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170608859 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jun. 07, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 07, 2017
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME FOR INITIAL DISCLOSURES [F.R.C.P. 26(a)(1)] KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN ALL PARTIES AS FOLLOWS: Plaintiff California River Watch ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant the City of Vacaville (the "City") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby respectfully apply to this Court for an Order continuing the date for the Parties to exchange Initial Disclosures pu
More

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME FOR INITIAL DISCLOSURES [F.R.C.P. 26(a)(1)]

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN ALL PARTIES AS FOLLOWS:

Plaintiff California River Watch ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant the City of Vacaville (the "City") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby respectfully apply to this Court for an Order continuing the date for the Parties to exchange Initial Disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") 26(a)(1) until 45 days after service of notice of this Court's ruling on the Motion to Dismiss.

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2017, the City filed a motion to dismiss all claims in this action pursuant to FRCP Rule 12(b)(6) ("Motion to Dismiss");

WHEREAS, the Motion to Dismiss is scheduled for hearing on June 16, 2017;

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court's Minute Order dated May 15, 2017, the initial pretrial scheduling conference in this action was advanced to June 16, 2017;

WHEREAS, the Parties met and conferred pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(f) on May 25, 2017, to consider the nature and basis of the claims and defenses, the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case; making or arranging for the disclosures required by FRCP Rule 26(a)(1), discussing any issues about preserving discoverable information, and developing a proposed discovery plan;

WHEREAS, the Parties' Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(a)(1) are currently due on June 8, 2017;

WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed that postponing Initial Disclosures till a date after this Court rules on the pending Motion to Dismiss would allow the Parties to avoid potentially unnecessary litigation costs;

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, between the Parties, subject to this Court's approval, that: the last date for the Parties to serve Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(a)(1), be continued until forty-five (45) days following service of notice of this Court's ruling on the Motion to Dismiss.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

For good cause shown, the above Stipulation is adopted as follows:

The last date for the Parties to submit Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(a)(1) is hereby continued until forty-five (45) days after service of notice of the Court's ruling on the City's Motion to Dismiss.

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