Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

SENDER v. FRANKLIN RESOURCES, INC., 11-cv-3828 EMC. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160408l63 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 08, 2016
Summary: SECOND STIPULATION AND [PR OP OSED] ORDER EXTENDING DISCOVERY DEADLINES EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . WHEREAS, this Court's First Amended Case Management and Pretrial Order for Jury Trial ("First Amended Case Management Order") (ECF No. 146), entered on October 19, 2015, set a non-expert discovery cut-off of February 18, 2016, an expert discovery cut-off of March 31, 2016, and a trial date of August 15, 2016; WHEREAS, on January 5, 2016, the Court entered an Order Extending Discove
More

SECOND STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DISCOVERY DEADLINES

WHEREAS, this Court's First Amended Case Management and Pretrial Order for Jury Trial ("First Amended Case Management Order") (ECF No. 146), entered on October 19, 2015, set a non-expert discovery cut-off of February 18, 2016, an expert discovery cut-off of March 31, 2016, and a trial date of August 15, 2016;

WHEREAS, on January 5, 2016, the Court entered an Order Extending Discovery Deadlines, based on a stipulation of the Parties, amending the Court's First Amended Case Management and Pretrial Order and extending the non-expert discovery deadline to April 30, 2016, the deadline to disclose expert reports to April 15, 2016, the deadline for expert rebuttal reports to May 6, 2016, and the expert discovery deadline to May 25, 2016 ("Second Amended Case Management Order") (ECF No. 178);

WHEREAS, the Parties have diligently engaged in discovery following the First and Second Amended Case Management Orders;

WHEREAS, since the First and Second Amended Case Management Orders, Defendant has produced fifty-eight boxes of hardcopy documents and over five thousand pages of documents from electronically stored information from nine custodians pursuant to Orders of the Court dated December 22, 2015, and January 14, 2016 (ECF Nos. 167, 181); and

WHEREAS, Franklin is continuing to copy for production to Plaintiff certain documents that were designated by Plaintiff for copying following inspection;

WHEREAS, since the First and Second Case Management Orders, Plaintiff has produced 1,424 pages of documents and answered in detail 18 interrogatories and 39 requests for admission, and was deposed on March 4, 2016;

WHEREAS, since the First and Second Amended Case Management Orders, the Parties have engaged in extensive discovery motion practice. Such motion practice includes the December 7, 2015 Letter Brief Regarding Defendant's Privilege Log and the Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege (ECF No. 170), the February 12, 2016 Letter Brief Regarding ERISA discovery Dispute (ECF No. 185), and the March 7, 2016 Letter Brief Regarding Dispute Concerning Section 419 Depositions (ECF No. 196) before Magistrate Judge Kim, and three objections by Plaintiff to the rulings by Magistrate Judge Kim on those motions, submitted to the Court, as follows: Plaintiff's March 3, 2016 Objection to a Portion of the Magistrate Judge's February 18, 2016 Order Re Attorney-Client Privilege (ECF No. 194), Plaintiff's March 17, 2016 Motion for Relief From Nondispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 207), and Plaintiff's March 23, 2016 Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 210);

WHEREAS, in light of the significant document productions that have been ongoing, the need for time to analyze those documents, and the motion practice concerning privilege issues and the scope of depositions, the Parties were not able to conduct certain depositions in March of 2016 and may not be able to conduct them all in April of 2016;

WHEREAS, the Parties are currently meeting and conferring over recent discovery requests from Plaintiff concerning inter alia other ESOP beneficiaries, Defendant's redactions of documents on privilege and privacy grounds, and other discovery issues, which may result in additional motion practice;

WHEREAS, the Parties have taken the deposition of Plaintiff, are in the process of scheduling ten depositions for deponents located in California, Florida, New Jersey, and New York, and anticipate scheduling additional depositions prior to the fact discovery cutoff;

WHEREAS, the scheduling of certain depositions has been further complicated by requests from certain witnesses, including several third-party witnesses, to postpone their depositions for personal reasons, including a request from Nicole Smith to postpone her deposition due to the recent passing of her mother, requests to reschedule depositions from Earl Johnson in Los Angeles, Judith Zitzewitz in Florida, Bank of New York Mellon in New York, and Linda Sender in Sacramento, as well as a request from witness Charles Johnson in Florida to reschedule his deposition to the first week of May when he will be in California on other business and could be deposed here;

WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred regarding the foregoing and agree that under the circumstances there is good cause to request a modest extension of the deadlines for non-expert and expert discovery to accommodate the analysis of recently-produced documents, the resolution of pending discovery disputes, the taking of remaining depositions, including a number of out of state depositions, and other additional discovery by the Parties; and

WHEREAS, the Parties are not requesting any continuance of the August 15, 2016 trial date or July 19, 2016 pre-trial conference set forth in the Court's October 19, 2015 First Amended Case Management and Pretrial Order (ECF No. 146);

THEREFORE, good cause existing, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the Parties hereto, through their counsel of record, that they jointly request a modification of the deadlines for fact and expert discovery in the Court's Order Extending Discovery Deadlines of January 5, 2016 (ECF. No. 178), and respectfully request the Court to adopt the following new deadlines:

1. The Parties respectfully request that the deadline for non-expert discovery be extended from pril 30, 2016 to May 31, 2016;

2. The Parties respectfully request that the deadline for disclosing expert opening reports be extended from April 15, 2016 to May 16, 2016;

3. The Parties respectfully request that the deadline for disclosing expert rebuttal reports be extended from May 6, 2016 to June 6, 2016; and

4. The Parties respectfully request that the deadline for expert discovery be extended from May 25, 2016 to June 24, 2016.

I attest that I have obtained Mr. Cera's and Mr. Huss's concurrence in the filing of this document.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, the following discovery deadlines are extended as follows: (1) the non-expert discovery cut-off is extended from April 30, 2016 to May 31, 2016; (2) the deadline for disclosing expert opening reports is extended from April 15, 2016 to May 16, 2016; (3) the deadline for disclosing expert rebuttal reports is extended from May 6, 2016 to June 6, 2016; and (4) the expert discovery cut-off is extended from May 25, 2016 to June 24, 2016. All other dates established by the First Amended Case Management and Pretrial Order for Jury Trial of October 19, 2015 are unchanged.

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