Pinnacle Armor, Inc. vs. USA

Filing 74

STIPULATION REGARDING DEFENDANT'S TIME TO RESPOND signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on November 28, 2012. (Munoz, I)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

STUART F. DELERY
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General
VINCENT M. GARVEY
Deputy Director
TAMRA T. MOORE
Trial Attorney
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Division
Federal Programs Branch
20 Massachusetts Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
District of Columbia Bar
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
Eastern District of California
JEFFREY J. LODGE
Assistant United States Attorney
United States Courthouse
2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401
Fresno, California 93271
Telephone: [phone]

13
14

Attorneys for Defendant United States
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17

PINNACLE ARMOR, INC.,
Plaintiff,

18
19
20
21

vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,1
Defendant.

22
23
24

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:07-cv-1655 (LJO)
STIPULATION REGARDING
DEFENDANT’S TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT
REVISED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

25
26
1

27
28

Although the caption of plaintiff’s First Amended Verified Complaint (“FAVC”) identifies the
United States of America as the defendant in this lawsuit, plaintiff’s FAVC states that this suit is
brought against the United States Department of Justice and the National Institute of Justice
(collectively, “the NIJ” or “the Government”).
STIPULATION REGARDING DEFENDANT’S TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT REVISED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD - 1

1

Plaintiff, Pinnacle Armor, Inc., and defendant, the National Institute of Justice (“NIJ”),

2
3

stipulate, pursuant to Local Rule 6-144(a) and subject to this Court’s approval, that:

4

1. NIJ has until December 21, 2012, to respond to plaintiff’s Motion to Supplement

5

Revised Administrative Record;
6

2. Plaintiff has until January 4, 2013, to file its reply in support of its Motion to

7

Supplement Revised Administrative Record; and

8
9

3. The hearing on plaintiff’s Motion to Supplement Revised Administrative Record shall

10

take place on January 11, 2013.

11

Counsel for NIJ seeks this enlargement of time to accommodate briefing schedules in

12
13
14

other cases for which she has primary responsibility.

15

s/ Eric H. Saiki_____________
ERIC H. SAIKI

16

Counsel for Plaintiff

17

Dated: November 28, 2012

Dated: November 28, 2012

18

s/ Tamra T. Moore_____________
TAMRA T. MOORE
Counsel for Defendant

19
20
21
22

ORDER
Based on the above stipulation of all parties to this action, the Court directs that:
Defendant’s response to plaintiffs’ Motion to Supplement Revised Administrative Record be
filed on or before December 21, 2012; Plaintiff’s reply in support of its Motion to Supplement
Revised Administrative Record be filed on or before January 4, 2013; and the hearing on
plaintiff’s motion will take place at 8:30 AM in Courtroom 4 on January 11, 2013.

23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.
25

Dated:

26

November 28, 2012

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

DEAC_Signature-END:

27
28

b2e55c0d
STIPULATION REGARDING DEFENDANT’S TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT REVISED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD - 2