Fresno Rock Taco, LLC v. National Surety Corporation

Filing 148

ORDER AFTER OCTOBER 4, 2012 HEARING signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on October 4, 2012. (Munoz, I)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13

FRESNO ROCK TACO, LLC,
et al.,

CASE NO. CV F 11-0845 LJO SKO
ORDER AFTER OCTOBER 4, 2012 HEARING

14
15
16

Plaintiffs,
vs.
NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION,

17

Defendant.
/

18
19

This Court held an October 4, 2012 hearing scheduled pursuant to an October 1, 2012 order to

20

meet and confer as to the motions in limine. The parties had ignored this Court’s order to meet and

21

confer in a good faith and meaningful manner prior to filing their motions in limine, and had not taken

22

seriously their duty to distill issues. Plaintiff Rock Taco, LLC appeared by telephone by counsel Richard

23

Hamlish (“Mr. Hamlish”). Defendant National Surety Corporation (“defendant”) appeared by telephone

24

through counsel John Hager and Sean Daniel Cooney. For the reasons set forth on the record, this Court

25

ORDERS as follows:

26

1.

No later than noon today, October 4, 2012, defendant shall prepare a statement that

27

identifies and distill the issues that are remain contested for each of the pending motions

28

in limine. This should be no more than one paragraph for each of the pending motions.
1

1

2.

No later than noon tomorrow, October 5, 2012, Mr. Hamlish shall respond to defendant’s

2

statement. He may agree or disagree with defendant’s statement and offer his own

3

paragraph to explain the distilled issue that is disputed for each motion.

4

3.

5

No later than 4:00 p.m. tomorrow, October 5, 2012, the parties shall file a joint statement
that explains what issues are left for each motion.

6

4.

This Court shall read and review the parties’ joint statement and the pending motions.

7

The Court intends to rule on these motions on the papers submitted. If, after reading and

8

reviewing the motions, this Court determines a hearing to be necessary, this Court shall

9

set a hearing on the motions.

10

5.

The Court orders that the joint statement shall be filed in lieu of oppositions to the

11

pending motions in limine. No oppositions shall be filed or considered unless further

12

ordered by this Court.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

Dated:
b9ed48

October 4, 2012

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

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2