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.

Kevin Marilley; Salvatore; Papetti; Savior v. Charlton H. Bonham

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION


June 15, 2012

KEVIN MARILLEY; SALVATORE; PAPETTI; SAVIOR PAPETTI, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CHARLTON H. BONHAM, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu

Stuart G. Gross (#251019) (sgross@gross-law.com) 2 Jared M. Galanis (#23859) (jgalanis@gross-law.com) 3 GROSS LAW The Embarcadero 4 Pier 9, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 5 t (415) 671-4628 f (415) 480-6688 6 Class Counsel

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE AMENDED SCHEDULE AS MODIFIED

its initial August 31, 2011 scheduling order as follows: Non-expert discovery cutoff - July 31, 3 14, 2012; Expert discovery cutoff - August 28, 2012; Last day to hear dispositive motions -5 2012; Joint pre-trial conference statement/trial briefs due - December 21, 2012; Objections due -7 2012 8:30 a.m.;

WHEREAS, at the February 23, 2012 hearing on class certification, the Court modified 2012; Expert disclosure deadline - July 31, 2012; Rebuttal expert disclosure deadline - August 4 September 27, 2012; Last day to meet and confer prior to pre-trial conference - December 11, 6 December 31, 2012; Pre-trial conference - January 9, 2012 3:00 p.m.; Bench trial - January 22, 8 WHEREAS, at the February 23, 2012 hearing, the Court also referred the parties to the Northern District ADR Panel to discuss possible approaches to settlement;

mediator and exchanged substantive settlement proposals until, on May 11, 2012, the parties 13 ultimately determined that, unfortunately, a settled resolution was not possible; 14 15 informal stay of discovery in order to focus their respective efforts on the achievement of a 16 settled resolution and avoid unnecessary work; 17 18 several factors would make compliance with the present schedule very difficult; 19 20 while having a material effect on the schedule for the case, are necessary to ensure that the 21 parties have a full and fair opportunity to litigate their respective cases; 22 Court:

WHEREAS, the parties participated in mediation sessions with a Court appointed WHEREAS, during the pendency of the mediation efforts, the parties entered into an WHEREAS, the parties agree that, in addition to factors related to this informal stay, WHEREAS, the parties further agree that the schedule modifications sought herein, WHEREAS, the following prior stipulated scheduling modifications were entered by the * August 8, 2011 (Dckt. No. 7), setting a briefing schedule for Defendants' response to the Complaint, and * On August 31, 2011, (Dckt. No. 23), setting a briefing schedule for Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction; and 2 the Court's February 23, 2012 scheduling order, except in the case of events for which that 3 order did not set a date, in which case slashes are included, and the third column in the chart 4 below reflects the proposed agreed upon dates; 5

LOCAL RULES 6-2 AND 7-12, SUBJECT TO COURT APPROVAL: 7

Deadlines Deadlines

Last day to propound any written discovery requests, with 9 the exception of requests for admission and associated 7/17/12 interrogatories 10

Last day to propound requests for admission and associated interrogatories 8/10/12 11

Last day to complete document productions 8/31/12 12

Expert disclosure deadline 7/31/12 9/17/12 14

Expert discovery cutoff 8/28/12 10/29/12 Last day for Plaintiffs to file a motion for summary 16 judgment and Daubert challenges //////// 11/29/12 Last day for Defendant to file opposition and cross-17 motion for summary judgment/opposition to Daubert //////// 1/7/13 challenges and cross-Daubert challenges 18

Last day for Plaintiffs to file reply ISO summary 19 judgment and opposition to cross-motion for summary judgment/reply ISO Daubert challenges and opposition to //////// 2/7/13 20 cross-Daubert challenges Last day for Defendant to file reply ISO cross-motion for summary judgment/reply ISO Daubert Challenges //////// 3/10/13 3/7/13 21

MSJs and Daubert Motions) 9/27/12 3/31/13 3/28/13 23

Joint pre-trial conference statement/trial briefs due 12/21/12 6/6/13 5/30/13 25

Pre-trial conference 6/22/13 6/19/13

3:00 p.m. 3:00 p.m.

WHEREAS, the second column in the chart below reflects dates set in accordance with

THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CIVIL 6

ITEM Previous Proposed

Last day to complete non-expert depositions //////// 9/14/12 Non-expert discovery cutoff 7/31/12 9/17/12 13

Rebuttal expert disclosure deadline 8/14/12 10/15/12 15

Last day to hear dispositive motions (Hearing on Cross 22

Last day to meet and confer prior to pre-trial conference 12/11/12 5/26/13 5/20/13 24

Objections due 12/31/12 6/17/13 6/10/13

1/9/13

1/22/13

Bench trial Length of trial not to exceed 4 days 6/27/13 7/1/13 28

ES DISTR

I

AT CT PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED,

IT IS SO ORDERED

AS MODIFIED

Judge Donna M. Ryu O

ATTESTATION REGARDING SIGNATURES

Pursuant to this Court's General Order 45, section X(B), I hereby attest that I have obtained concurrence in the filing of this Stipulation and Proposed Order from the other 4 signatory.

Dated: June 14, 2012

GROSS LAW 7 8 /s/ Stuart G. Gross Stuart G. Gross

20120615

© 1992-2012 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.