Tri-Dam v. Michael

Filing 21

STIPULATION and ORDER to extend non-expert discovery deadline to complete previously served discovery, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 2/15/2013. (Non-expert discovery due by 3/12/2013) (Figueroa, O)

1
2
3
4
5
6

DOWNEY BRAND LLP
KEVIN M. SEIBERT (Bar No. 119356)
THOMAS E. MARRS (Bar No. 252485)
621 Capitol Mall, 18th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TRI-DAM

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

FRESNO DIVISION

11
12

TRI-DAM,

13

Case No. 1:11-cv-02138-AWI-SMS
Plaintiff,

14

v.

15

ANDREANA MICHAEL,

16

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND
NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINE
TO COMPLETE PREVIOUSLY SERVED
DISCOVERY

Defendant.

17
18
19

Plaintiff Tri-Dam (“Tri-Dam”) and defendant Andreana Michael (“Michael”), by and
through their respective counsel of record, hereby submit the following Stipulation and Proposed
Order To Extend Non-Expert Discovery Deadline To Complete Previously Served Discovery.

20

RECITALS

21
1.

22
23

Complaint.
2.

24
25

This action commenced on December 27, 2011, with the filing of Tri-Dam’s

The Complaint seeks a permanent injunction against Michael related to shoreline

improvements on real property she owns in Calaveras County.

26

3.

Michael answered the Complaint on April 19, 2012.

27

4.

The Court’s Scheduling Order provided for a February 15, 2013, non-expert

28

discovery deadline.
1
1302300.2

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO EXTEND NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

5.

Documents, Interrogatories, and Requests for Admissions, Set One (“Written Discovery”), to
Michael’s counsel at the correct street address, but inadvertently addressed to their old suite
number (Suite 101), instead of the current one (Suite 900). The Written Discovery was not
returned as undeliverable. On February 4, 2013, Tri-Dam’s counsel inquired why they had not
received responses to the Written Discovery. On February 5, Michael’s counsel notified TriDam’s counsel that they had not received the Written Discovery by mail and that they believed
service was improper. Tri-Dam re-served its Written Discovery requests to Michael at the correct
suite number that same day. If February 5, 2013, is used as the date of service, Michael’s
responses to the Written Discovery would be due on March 12, 2013.

11
12
13
14
15

6.

18
19
20
21

counsel that he was not available to attend the depositions on that day. On February 1, Michael
noticed Tri-Dam’s deposition on an unspecified date. The parties met and conferred and agreed
to reschedule the depositions for February 19, 2013, and, if necessary, February 20, 2013.
7.

In order to accommodate the schedules of the parties and counsel, and to avoid

burdening the Court with motion practice, the parties agree to complete Michael’s, Lupo’s, and
Tri-Dam’s depositions, as well as Tri-Dam’s Written Discovery, after the current February 15,
2013, non-expert discovery deadline. Accordingly, Tri-Dam and Michael believe good cause
exists for a continuance of the current non-expert discovery deadline to March 12, 2013, for the
limited purpose of completing this previously served discovery.

22

STIPULATION

23

Based on the foregoing recitals, Tri-Dam and Michael hereby STIPULATE that:

24
25

On January 17, 2013, Tri-Dam noticed Michael’s deposition and the deposition of

John Lupo (“Lupo”) for February 15. Michael’s counsel subsequently informed Tri-Dam’s

16
17

On December 28, 2012, Tri-Dam’s counsel mailed Requests for Production of

1.

The non-expert discovery deadline is continued from February 15, 2013, to March

12, 2013, for the limited purpose of completing previously served discovery.

26
27
28
2
1302300.2

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO EXTEND NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES

1
2
3

2.

completion of those depositions, on February 19, 2013, and February 20, 2013, if necessary,
Michael will take Tri-Dam’s deposition.

4
5
6
7

3.

Discovery is not untimely based on the original February 15, 2013, non-expert discovery
deadline.
4.

12

This continuance of the deadline to complete previously served non-expert

discovery will not affect any other deadlines in this action.

10
11

Tri-Dam agrees that Michael’s responses to the Written Discovery will be timely

so long as they are served on or before March 12, 2013. Michael agrees that the Written

8
9

Michael’s and Lupo’s depositions will occur on February 19, 2013. Upon

5.

All remaining dates and deadlines as set by the Court in its September 10, 2012,

Scheduling Order, are otherwise unaffected by this Stipulation and Proposed Order.
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

13
14
DATED: February 13, 2013

DOWNEY BRAND LLP

15
16
By:

/s/ Thomas E. Marrs
THOMAS E. MARRS
Attorney for Plaintiff TRI-DAM

17
18
19

DATED: February 13, 2013

PARR LAW GROUP

20
By:

21

/s/ Shawn R. Parr (as authorized on 2/13/13)
SHAWN R. PARR
Attorney for Defendant
ANDREANA MICHAEL

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
1302300.2

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO EXTEND NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES

1

ORDER

2

This matter came before the Court on the Stipulation and Proposed Order To Extend

3

Non-Expert Discovery Deadline To Complete Previously Served Discovery. For the reasons

4

stated in the Stipulation and for good cause showing, the Court ADOPTS the Stipulation and

5

GRANTS the relief requested therein.

6

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the non-expert discovery deadline is

7

continued, from February 15, 2013, to March 12, 2013, for the limited purpose of completing

8

previously served discovery.

9
10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 15, 2013
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:

14
0m8i788
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
1302300.2

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO EXTEND NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES