Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Orchard Enterprises, Inc. v. TufAmerica

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION


January 6, 2009

THE ORCHARD ENTERPRISES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
TUFAMERICA, INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.

SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINES FOR EXPERT DISCLOSURES AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-144, Plaintiff The Orchard Enterprises, Inc. ("The Orchard") and Defendant TufAmerica, Inc. ("TufAmerica") hereby stipulate to continue the deadlines set in this Court's October 10, 2008 Order ("Amended Scheduling Order") for initial expert witness disclosures and rebuttal expert disclosures. In compliance with the Court's initial May 30, 2008 Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order ("Initial Scheduling Order"), the parties submit that good cause exists for the requested continuance as set forth below.

1. The parties earlier requested a continuance of expert discovery deadlines because they had been focused on settlement efforts, which proved unsuccessful, and needed additional time to retain experts, prepare expert reports and conduct further discovery. The Court granted that request in its Amended Scheduling Order.

2. Since that time, the parties have engaged in extensive discovery efforts. The Orchard has filed two motions to compel, sought to resolve numerous discovery disputes informally with TufAmerica, and served an additional set of written discovery. TufAmerica has served three sets of written discovery, in addition to conducting various meet and confer efforts with The Orchard. As such, the parties have been diligently prosecuting their respective cases. In addition, The Orchard retained an expert in November 2008 and has been diligently preparing its expert report. However, as a result of scheduling issues around the holidays, as well as the two-week illness of one of The Orchard's lead attorneys (who was in the midst of preparing the expert report), the parties need additional time (three weeks) to prepare expert disclosures.

3. Other than their October 7, 2008 request to continue expert deadlines, the parties have not previously requested any continuances of these expert deadlines or any other deadlines set forth in the Initial Scheduling Order.

4. The requested continuance will not affect the trial date, pretrial conference date or any other deadlines set forth in the Court's Initial Scheduling Order or Amended Scheduling Order, other than the requested extension of expert disclosures deadlines.

Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to the following deadlines and respectfully request that they be adopted by the Court:

Last day to serve initial expert disclosures and reports in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2): February 2, 2009.

Last day to serve rebuttal expert disclosures in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2): March 2, 2009.

DATED: January 6, 2009

REED SMITH LLP

William R. Overend Attorneys for The Orchard Enterprises, Inc.

DATED: January 6, 2009

PICK & BOYDSTON, LLP

Erik S. Syverson Attorneys for TufAmerica, Inc.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20090106

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.