STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE AMENDMENT OF TRIAL DATE AND CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES IN LIGHT OF MEDIATION SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 2010
Management Issues on December 24, 2008 (Dkt. 8), in which initial case deadlines were postponed approximately 30 days to permit the parties to attend private mediation in January
WHEREAS, the parties to this action attended private mediation on January 23, 2009;
WHEREAS, this Court entered a Further Stipulation and Order Regarding Initial Case Management Deadlines and Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading on February 5,
WHEREAS, this Court entered a Stipulation and Order Regarding Initial Case Deadlines 2009; 2009 (Dkt. 10), in which initial case deadlines were further postponed to permit the parties to this action to attend a further private mediation session in March 2009; and continued telephonic discussions with the assistance of the mediator until April 2009;
WHEREAS, the parties to this action attended private mediation on March 13, 2009, and
WHEREAS, the parties to this action attended an initial case management conference on June 12, 2009 and the Court entered a Pretrial Preparation Order (Docket #25).
By and through their attorneys of record, the parties stipulate as follows:
1. Since late summer 2009, the parties have met and conferred regarding and been engaged in discovery of electronically stored information. The parties negotiated a list of approximately 150 search terms and have been diligently engaged in gathering electronic data responsive to the search terms dating back more than ten years and producing the data after appropriate privilege review. Due to the scope of the data available for searching on both sides, this process has proven more difficult than either party anticipated, and despite the best efforts of the litigants, discovery of electronically stored information has not been completed and will not likely be completed within the next sixty days. The parties have jointly concluded that the case management deadlines cannot realistically be complied with in light of the unforeseen problems with discovery of electronically stored information, which must be completed before resources should be expended on depositions, expert disclosure and expert-related discovery.
2. In September of 2009, counsel began to meet and confer on a possible additional mediation effort which would encompass this litigation as well as the parties to United States of America v. California Department of Transportation, Action 09- 0437 PJH. In that action, the United States, including The Presidio Trust, are represented by Bradley O'Brien and Davis Forsythe of the United States Department of Justice, Environmental and Natural Resources Division in San Francisco and Washington, D.C., and California Department of Transportation is represented by Janet Wong of the California Department of Transportation. That action concerns the same pollution at issue in this case. Due to the number of parties and attorneys involved, it has taken some time to coordinate a global mediation. Recently, all parties in both actions agreed to attend a global, two-day mediation on March 11-12, 2010 in San Francisco, California with Timothy Gallagher, Esq. serving as the mediator It is unknown whether additional sessions may be necessary, but given the scope of the issues presented in the two actions, that is a real possibility.
3. In light of the complexity and volume of the electronic discovery issue and the global mediation scheduled for next week, counsel of record in this action believe and agree that the case management deadlines set by the Court in Docket #25 for the trial date, non-expert discovery cutoff, designation of experts, expert discovery cutoff, dispositive motion filing date and pretrial conference will be extremely difficult to comply with and should be postponed by approximately 120 days to permit the parties to focus their resources on resolving this matter at mediation.
The postponement will also permit the parties to delay further expenditure of resources on the production of electronically stored information, which has proven to be difficult and burdensome on both parties, until after the global mediation process is complete.
4. Consistent with the foregoing paragraph, the parties agree to the following revised case management schedule, subject to the approval of the Court:
a. Trial date: February 28, 2011
b. Non-expert discovery cutoff: ...