Hunter v. Sokoloff, 14-CV-05031-JST. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190502e77
Visitors: 13
Filed: May 01, 2019
Latest Update: May 01, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO SERVE DISCOVERY RELATING TO AUTHENTICITY AND ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . Plaintiff John Douglas Hunter and Defendant M. Sokoloff have stipulated to extend the close of fact discovery deadline from the current deadline of June 7, 2019 to August 2, 2019 (same day as expert discovery cut-off), solely for discovery relating to authenticity and admissibility of the evidence in this case (including, for exa
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO SERVE DISCOVERY RELATING TO AUTHENTICITY AND ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . Plaintiff John Douglas Hunter and Defendant M. Sokoloff have stipulated to extend the close of fact discovery deadline from the current deadline of June 7, 2019 to August 2, 2019 (same day as expert discovery cut-off), solely for discovery relating to authenticity and admissibility of the evidence in this case (including, for exam..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO SERVE DISCOVERY RELATING TO AUTHENTICITY AND ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.
Plaintiff John Douglas Hunter and Defendant M. Sokoloff have stipulated to extend the close of fact discovery deadline from the current deadline of June 7, 2019 to August 2, 2019 (same day as expert discovery cut-off), solely for discovery relating to authenticity and admissibility of the evidence in this case (including, for example, discovery relating to custodians and business records, discovery relating to authenticity, discovery related to source and chain of custody of produced documents and things). This extension does not apply to other discovery not relating to authenticity and admissibility of the evidence in this case.
This extension allows the parties the necessary time to meet and confer about stipulating to the authenticity and admissibility of evidence in this case, thereby avoiding or reducing discovery on non-parties, including, for example, custodians of records at the CDCR.
ATTESTATION
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the undersigned filer of this document certifies that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
