Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Daniel Delgado v. Orchard Supply Hardware Corporation

February 8, 2011

DANIEL DELGADO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE CORPORATION,
DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

STIPULATION TO EXTEND DATES SET IN SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER; DECLARATION OF TANYA E. MOORE; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW R. ORR

Complaint Filed October 20, 2009

Trial Date: May 16, 2011

Plaintiff Daniel Delgado ("Plaintiff") and Orchard Supply Hardware Corporation ("Defendant" and, together with Plaintiff, the "Parties"), through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: Delgado v. Orchard Supply Hardware Corp.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff seeks to file a Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") to address recent facts and legal precedents that have only recently been discovered by Plaintiff;

WHEREAS, this Court filed its scheduling order in this matter on June 15, 2010, which set the following deadlines:

Non-expert discovery cut-off February 1, 2011; and Expert discovery cut-off February 15, 2011; and Deadline for filing non-dispositive motions February 17, 2011; and Deadline for filing dispositive motions February 17, 2011; and Pre-trial conference April 5, 2011; and Trial May 16, 2011.

WHEREAS, the Parties have been diligently undertaking to complete discovery, having taken the depositions of both parties, exchanged expert reports, conducted a site inspection with their experts, and exchanged multiple sets of written discovery;

WHEREAS, in light of the anticipated amendment to Plaintiff's complaint and the likelihood that expert reports may need to address the new allegations, the Parties have put off expert depositions until this issue is resolved;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff has requested that Defendant stipulate to the filing of the proposed SAC;

WHEREAS, Defendant would be unduly and unjustly prejudiced should Plaintiff be allowed to amend the complaint at this stage without affording Defendant sufficient time to respond to the complaint, obtain basic and expert discovery related to the new allegations, and file its anticipated motion for summary judgment;

WHEREAS, notwithstanding the foregoing, Defendant has agreed not to oppose Plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint; provided Defendant is allowed sufficient time to respond to the amended complaint; evaluate the need for further discovery; modify, if necessary, its expert report(s); and file its anticipated motion for summary judgment;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and among the Parties, through their undersigned counsel, that the following deadlines be continued from the dates currently ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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