The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable Jeffrey S. White
STIPULATED REQUEST TO VACATE AND CONTINUE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND ASSOCIATED DATES; [PROPOSED] ORDER Pretrial Conf.: August 18, 2008 Time: 2:00 p.m. Place: Courtroom 2
Plaintiffs Humboldt Baykeeper and Ecological Rights Foundation and Defendants Union Pacific Railroad Company, CUE VI, LLC, and North Coast Railroad Authority (collectively, the "Parties") file this motion to bring to the Court's attention a scheduling problem. The Court's Guidelines for Trial and Final Pretrial Conference in Civil Bench Cases requires the parties to serve motions in limine by July 21, 2008, serve oppositions to those motions by July 29, and by August 4 file a joint pretrial statement and other documents. However, until the Parties receive the Court's ruling on the pending cross-motions for summary judgment, directed to all counts of Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint, the Parties cannot know the issues that the Court's ruling may eliminate for trial, and cannot prepare documents responsive to the Court's ruling. Submission of pretrial documents prior to the Court's ruling is likely to be unnecessarily voluminous and may address issues disposed of by the Court's ruling. The Parties are thus in need of the Court's ruling on the cross-motions to prepare for trial.
Therefore, pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b) and 6-2, and this Court's Civil Standing Order, ¶ 3, the Parties in the above-captioned case hereby stipulate and jointly request that this Court issue an order vacating and continuing the August 18, 2008 Pretrial Conference and associated deadlines.
Defendants request that the Court continue the Pretrial Conference until September 2, 2008 and oppose continuation of the September 15, 2008 Trial date.
Plaintiffs request that the Court continue the Pretrial Conference until a reasonable time after the Court issues its decision on the Parties' pending motions for summary judgment and set a Case Management Conference for August 18, 2008, or for 10 days after the Court rules on the Parties' respective motions for summary judgment, whichever is sooner, for the purpose of resetting dates and, as necessary, to clarify issues to be tried.
The parties jointly declare the following in support of this request:
WHEREAS, the Court's October 15, 2007 Scheduling Order set a Pretrial Conference for August 18, 2008 and a bench Trial date of September 15, 2008; and
WHEREAS, commencing on July 21, 2008 and prior to the August 18, 2008 Pretrial Conference, the parties must, inter alia, exchange, oppose and file their motions in limine for the Court's decision, submit a Final Pretrial Order for the Court's review, confer regarding trial exhibits and evidence issues, and file for the Court's review their respective Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with separate Trial Briefs; and
WHEREAS, the Court heard arguments on June 13, 2008 and presently has under submission Plaintiffs' and Defendants' respective motions for summary judgment on all three counts of Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint;
WHEREAS, the Court's rulings on these pending summary judgment motions may moot and/or narrow claims, issues, evidence, and disputes for trial; and,
WHEREAS, consequently, the Court's rulings on the pending summary judgment motions may significantly modify the scope, volume, and content of the parties' respective Pretrial Conference filings and motions, as identified above, due to be considered and decided by the Court; and
WHEREAS, the Parties believe that it would best serve judicial economy for this Court to issue the requested Order; and
WHEREAS, the Parties have conferred and determined that the requested Order would be in the agreed best interests of the Parties and have a beneficial effect on the narrowing of issues and the efficient trial of this case; and
WHEREAS, the Parties reserve their respective rights to move to limit, exclude and otherwise object to evidence and to withdraw, modify, and otherwise address such existing motions and ...