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.

Samuel Brandon Kress, et al v. Pricewaterhousecoopers Llp

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 30, 2012

SAMUEL BRANDON KRESS, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE ON DISCOVERY MOTIONS

WHEREAS, on October 11, 2012, Defendant PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP ("Defendant" 3 or "PwC") filed a notice of motion for an order determining Plaintiffs' responses to PwC's 4 written discovery requests to be insufficient and compelling sufficient responses to PwC's 5 discovery requests, which PwC noticed to be heard on November 1, 2012 (Docket: 307); 6

WHEREAS, on October 11, 2012, Plaintiffs filed an Ex Parte Application seeking to 7 compel PwC to produce the designated 30(b)(6) witness for additional days of deposition or to set 8 a briefing schedule for a motion to compel to be heard on the issue (Docket: 308); 9

WHEREAS, on October 12, 2012, the Court in response to Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application set a hearing date for Plaintiffs' motion to compel to be heard on November 1, 2012 11 (Docket 309); 12

WHEREAS, on October 19, 2012, Plaintiffs provided further responses to some of the 13 discovery requests that are the subject matter of PwC's above-referenced discovery motion; 14

WHEREAS, the parties intend to engage in further meet and confer efforts regarding Plaintiffs' responses to PwC's discovery requests, the result of which may impact the scope of 16 PwC's discovery motion; 17

WHEREAS, to accommodate these discussions as well as the unavailability of Plaintiffs' 18 counsel, the parties jointly seek to continue the November 1, 2012 hearing date for the parties' 19 respective discovery motions; 20

WHEREAS, the parties request that their motions be heard on the next available hearing 21 date, which the parties understand to be December 6, 2012; 22

NOW THEREFORE, the parties stipulate that the Court may enter an Order as follows:

1. The discovery motions presently set to be heard on November 1, 2012, shall 24 instead be heard on December 6, 2012. 25 26 27 28

Dated: October 25, 2012 PETER MUHIC Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP EDWARD WYNNE Wynne Law Firm WILLIAM BAIRD Markun Zusman & Compton LLP STEVEN ELSTER Law Office of Stephen Elster By: /s/William Baird WILLIAM BAIRD Attorneys for Plaintiffs SAMUEL BRANDON KRESS, et al. Dated: October 25, 2012 DANIEL J. THOMASCH LAUREN J. ELLIOT MICHELE L. MARYOTT JULIAN W. POON Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP NORMAN C. HILE JULIE A. TOTTEN DAVID A. PRAHL Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP By: /s/Daniel J. Thomasch DANIEL J. THOMASCH Attorneys for Defendant PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Gregory G. Hollows

20121030

© 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.