Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 108

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 101 MOTION to Compel Responses to Cisco System, Inc.'s First Request for Production and Brief in Support Thereof by John Ward, Jr. (Patton, Nicholas)

Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Doc. 108

Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 108

Filed 09/30/09 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION JOHN WARD, JR. § § § § § § § §

v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.

C.A. NO. 4:08cv4022 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

OPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT CISCO SYSTEMS INC.'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO CISCO SYSTEM, INC.'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION Come now Plaintiff, John Ward, Jr., and files this opposed motion for extension of time to respond to Defendant Cisco Systems Inc.'s Motion to Compel Responses to Cisco System, Inc.'s First Request for Production (DE #101), and respectfully show as follows: 1. On September 11, 2009, Defendant filed its Motion to Compel Responses to

Cisco System, Inc.'s First Request for Production. Plaintiff was in the midst of trial preparation in the matter of Albritton v. Cisco, pending in the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Cause No. 6:08cv89, and failed to see the filing the subject of this motion. The Albritton trial began on September 14th and counsel for Plaintiff was away from the office when the motion was filed. For most of the issues raised in Cisco's motion, Cisco failed to meet and confer with Plaintiff. Thus, Plaintiff had no reason to expect the filing of the motion and in the midst of trial failed to see that Cisco filed a motion to compel. 2. Plaintiff calculates its deadline to respond to Defendant's Motion to Compel

Responses to Cisco System, Inc.'s First Request for Production was due on or about September 25, 2009. 1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 108

Filed 09/30/09 Page 2 of 3

3.

Plaintiff, upon realization of its mistake, immediately contacted opposing counsel

via telephone and email and requested until Monday, October 5, 2009, to file its response. 4. Although Plaintiff believes that Cisco will act in good-faith and permit Plaintiff

additional time in which to respond to its motion, which raises a host of issues including critical claims of attorney client privileged communications, Plaintiff is filing this opposed motion in an abundance of caution as Plaintiff is currently unaware of Defendant's position regarding its request. Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully requests this motion be granted and that the time to respond to Defendant Cisco Systems Inc.'s Motion to Compel Responses to Cisco System, Inc.'s First Request for Production be extended to Monday, October 5, 2009. Respectfully submitted,

Nicholas H. Patton (SBN: 63035) PATTON, TIDWELL & SCHROEDER, LLP 4605 Texas Boulevard - P. O. Box 5398 Texarkana, Texas 7550505398 [phone] / [phone] (fax) Email: [e-mail] Patricia L. Peden LAW OFFICE OF PATRICIA L. PEDEN 1316 67th Street, Suite 6 Emeryville, CA 94608 Telephone: [phone] Email: [e-mail] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

2

Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 108

Filed 09/30/09 Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on this 30th day of September, 2009, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Responses to Cisco System, Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories was served electronically upon: Richard E. Griffin Charles Babcock Crystal Parker JACKSON WALKER, LLP 1401 McKinney Suite 1900 Houston, Texas 77010 Attorney for Defendant Cisco Systems, Inc.

Nicholas H. Patton

3