From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stuckey v. USA Trucking, Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 2, 2015
2:14-cv-01091-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Jul. 2, 2015)

Opinion

          Rory C. Quintana, QUINTANA HANAFI, PUNGPRAKEARTI, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff Virgil Stuckey.

          YULI LAW OFFICES, Yuli Kaplunovsky, Sunnyvale, California, Attorneys for Defendants USA Trucking, Inc. and Gurtej Singh.


          STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINES AND ORDER FOR: DISCOVERY CUT-OFF, DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS, PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE, AND TRIAL DATE

          JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.

         Pursuant to the Parties' agreement of July 1, 2015, and for the reasons described below, as well as an effort to continue good faith and ongoing efforts toward informal resolution, the Parties' hereby agree to continue the deadlines set forth for Discovery, Motions, the Pre-Trial Conference and Trial as described below.

         Following the Court's April 17, 2015 deadline, the Parties met and conferred regarding Defendants' initial discovery responses. Plaintiff's counsel provided Defendants' counsel time to become caught up with the case and then began requesting amended responses. At the same time, Plaintiff's counsel also began meeting and conferring regarding dates for Defendants' depositions as well as the depositions of their witnesses. Throughout this process, the Parties have made efforts to discuss resolution of this matter in good faith. On or about June 24, 2015, Defendants' counsel informed Plaintiff's counsel for the first time that he would be unavailable from July 4, 2015 through July 26, 2015.

         On July 1, 2015, during the deposition of Defendant Gurtej Singh, Mr. Singh made reference to documents which he states were provided to his prior counsel and which are responsive to Plaintiff's initial discovery requests. However, Plaintiff has not received those documents. In an effort to have a more meaningful and effective deposition, Plaintiff and Defendants' counsel agreed that Defendants' counsel would provide all documents immediately and in any event no later than July 3, 2015 and that Plaintiff would continue Defendant Gurtej Singh's deposition to July 27, 2015. During that same deposition, Plaintiff and Defendants' counsel were able to make significant headway in negotiations and discussed the use of third party mediation.

         Based on these facts and ongoing discovery issues related in part to the withdrawal of Defendants' prior counsel, the Parties have agreed to continue the deadlines set forth for Discovery, Motions, the Pre-Trial Conference and Trial as follows: (1) the Discovery Deadline, currently set for August 10, 2015, will be extended to September 11, 2015; (2) Dispositive Motions Deadline, currently set for August 19, 2015 will be extended to September 21, 2015 and the Dispositive Motion hearings, currently set for notice on September 16, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. will be set for October 21, 2015 at 9:30 a.m.; (3) the Pre-Trial Conference, currently set for December 4, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. will be extended to January 8, 2016 at 10:00 a.m., with joint pretrial statements, currently due by November 27, 2015, due on December 30, 2015; (4) the Jury Trial, currently set for January 26, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. will be extended to February 22, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.

         The parties respectfully request the Court enter an order that current deadlines listed above be extended as agreed to by the parties.

         WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants agreed to the above scheduling changes during a conference during the deposition of Defendant Gurtej Singh on July 1, 2015;

         THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff and Defendants through their designated counsel that the above scheduling changes be granted and entered by the Court.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

         The Court having considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefore, orders as follows:

         1. The proposed deadlines as described above shall be granted.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Stuckey v. USA Trucking, Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 2, 2015
2:14-cv-01091-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Jul. 2, 2015)
Case details for

Stuckey v. USA Trucking, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:VIRGIL STUCKEY, an individual; Plaintiffs, v. U.S.A. TRUCKING, INC., a…

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

Date published: Jul 2, 2015

Citations

2:14-cv-01091-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Jul. 2, 2015)