From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Real v. Ramos

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Sacramento Division
Sep 28, 2015
2:09-cv-03273-GEB-KJN (PC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2015)

Opinion

          Mark E. Merin Paul H. Masuhara LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN Sacramento, California Attorneys for Plaintiff RANDY REAL

          KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General of California MONICA N. ANDERSON, Supervising Deputy Attorney General JAIME M. GANSON, Deputy Attorney General Sacramento, CA Attorneys for Defendant R. RAMOS


          STIPULATION TO VACATE DISCOVERY DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

          KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

         INTRODUCTION

         Plaintiff Randy Real ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Captain Ramos ("Defendant") request that the Court vacate the discovery and dispositive-motion deadlines while the parties pursue settlement discussions. A stipulation and proposed order reflecting this request is included below.

         RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION

         1. The current discovery deadline in this matter is October 23, 2015. (ECF No. 89 at 5:12.)

         2. The pretrial-motion deadline, excluding motions to compel discovery, is January 8, 2015. (ECF No. 89 at 5:15-16.)

         3. Plaintiff's motion to strike affirmative defenses from Defendant's answer to the second amended complaint is currently pending decision by this Court. (ECF No. 96.)

         4. Plaintiff intends to serve discovery concerning the affirmative defenses that remain following the ruling on the motion to strike.

         5. Defendant has served written discovery on Plaintiff, including requests for admissions, requests for production, and interrogatories. Plaintiff's responses to these requests are still outstanding. Defendant also intends to take Plaintiff's deposition.

         6. The parties wish to engage in settlement discussions in a good faith effort to resolve this matter short of continued litigation. However, Plaintiff's incarceration has prolonged settlement discussions because correspondence between the Plaintiff and his counsel is limited and delayed.

         7. In the event that settlement discussions are unsuccessful, the parties wish to reserve their right to complete the remaining and outstanding discovery necessary to effectively litigate this matter to conclusion. Furthermore, some subjects of discovery may be mooted by the Court's entry of an order regarding Plaintiff's pending motion to strike.

         8. To permit the parties adequate time to focus on settlement without incurring further litigation costs that could hinder the settlement discussions, the parties request that the Court vacate the current discovery and dispositive-motion deadlines and reset them, if necessary, if the settlement efforts fail. The parties will promptly alert the Court if the case does not settle and will propose new discovery and dispositive-motion deadlines for the Court's consideration.

         STIPULATION

         The parties STIPULATE to vacate the October 23, 2015 discovery deadline and the January 8, 2015 pretrial-motion deadline, and to stay the deadline for responding to all outstanding discovery requests until the parties' settlement discussions have concluded and the Court issues a decision regarding Plaintiff's pending motion to strike.

         [PROPOSED] ORDER

         Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. The October 23, 2015 discovery deadline is vacated.

         2. The January 8, 2015 pretrial-motion deadline is vacated.

         3. If the case does not settle, within fifteen days of the conclusion of settlement negotiations or the entry of the Court's ruling on Plaintiff's motion to strike, whichever is later, but in no case later than December 31, 2015, the parties shall file a joint proposal to reset the discovery and pretrial-motion deadlines.


Summaries of

Real v. Ramos

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Sacramento Division
Sep 28, 2015
2:09-cv-03273-GEB-KJN (PC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2015)
Case details for

Real v. Ramos

Case Details

Full title:RANDY REAL, Plaintiff, v. R. RAMOS, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Sacramento Division

Date published: Sep 28, 2015

Citations

2:09-cv-03273-GEB-KJN (PC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2015)