Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

WORLEY v. AVANQUEST NORTH AMERICA, INC., 3:12-CV-04391-SI. (2013)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20130507831
Filed: May 06, 2013
Latest Update: May 06, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge. Plaintiffs Benson Worley and Johnny Boyd, and Defendant Avanquest North America, Inc. ("Avanquest") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree, subject to Court approval, (i) to continue the Initial Case Management Conference and deadline to exchange initial disclosures, currently scheduled for Friday, May 10, 2013, to Friday, July 12, 2013 (or such later date and time
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.

Plaintiffs Benson Worley and Johnny Boyd, and Defendant Avanquest North America, Inc. ("Avanquest") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree, subject to Court approval, (i) to continue the Initial Case Management Conference and deadline to exchange initial disclosures, currently scheduled for Friday, May 10, 2013, to Friday, July 12, 2013 (or such later date and time as may be convenient for the Court), and (ii) to extend the date for filing the Parties' Joint Initial Case Management Conference Statement and Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 26(f) Discovery Plan from Friday, May 3, 2013 to Friday, July 5, 2013 (or one week before the date selected by the Court for the rescheduled Initial Case Management Conference). In support of the instant stipulation, the Parties state as follows:

WHEREAS, on February 22, 2013, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Class Action Complaint (Dkt. 52);

WHEREAS, on March 8th, Avanquest filed its pleading challenge of the First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 53);

WHEREAS, the hearing on Avanquest's pleading challenge is scheduled for Thursday, May 2, 2013;

WHEREAS, the resolution of Avanquest's pleading challenge will provide the Parties and the Court additional guidance regarding the most efficient manner in which to conduct further litigation of Plaintiffs' claims;

WHEREAS, the Parties previously requested and were granted a continuance of the Initial Case Management Conference and deadline to exchange initial disclosures until three weeks following the hearing on Avanquest's pleading challenge (Dkt. 51);

WHEREAS, the hearing on Avanquest's pleading challenge was subsequently continued thirteen days without a continuance of the Initial Case Management Conference or deadline to exchange initial disclosures (Dkt. 61);

WHEREAS, the Parties have conferred and agreed, subject to Court approval, to continue the Initial Case Management Conference and deadline to exchange initial disclosures from May 10, 2013 to July 12, 2013 (or such later date as the Court may set), and to extend the date for filing of the Parties' Joint Initial Case Management Conference Statement and Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 26(f) Discovery Plan from May 3, 2010 to July 5, 2013 (or one week prior to the date selected by the Court for the rescheduled Initial Case Management Conference);

WHEREAS, good cause exists to enter the instant stipulation and the Parties do not seek the relief contemplated herein for any improper purpose.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED as follows:

1. The Parties shall file their Joint Initial Case Management Conference Statement and Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 26(f) Discovery Plan by July 5, 2013 (or one week before the rescheduled Initial Case Management Conference if scheduled later than July 12, 2013).

2. The Initial Case Management Conference currently set for May 10, 2013 at 2:30 pm shall be continued to July 12, 2013 at 2:30 pm.

3. The Parties shall serve their respective initial disclosures no later than July 12, 2013.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

I, Luanne Sacks, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file the foregoing Stipulation and [Proposed] Order. I hereby attest that the above-referenced signatory to this stipulation has 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