Merced Irrigation District v. County of Mariposa

Filing 20

STIPULATION and ORDER GRANTING the parties' request for a continuance of the Scheduling Conference. The Scheduling Conference currently noticed for hearing on 12/13/2012 is CONTINUED, and will now be heard on 4/2/2013 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 7 (SKO) before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. The parties are DIRECTED to complete a Rule 26(f) conference by 3/12/2013; file their report re same by 3/26/2013; and serve their Rule 26(a)(1) and (2) disclosures by 4/16/2013. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 11/21/2012. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5

Thomas M. Berliner (SBN 83256)
Jolie-Anne S. Ansley (SBN 221526)
DUANE MORRIS LLP
Spear Tower
One Market Plaza, Suite 2200
San Francisco, CA 94105-1127
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail:[e-mail]
[e-mail]

6
7
8
9
10

John P. Coyle (admitted pro hac vice)
Abby C. Briggerman (admitted pro hac vice)
DUNCAN & ALLEN
1575 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20005
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

11
Attorneys for MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT
12
13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

FRESNO DIVISION

16
17

MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT,
Plaintiff,

18
19
20

Case No.: 12-cv-01645-LJO-SKO

v.
COUNTY OF MARIPOSA,

STIPULATION AND ORDER
CONTINUING DECEMBER 13, 2012,
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND
ASSOCIATED DEADLINES

Defendant.

21
22
23

COUNTY OF MARIPOSA, a political subdivision
of the State of California,
Counter Claimant,

24
25
26

v.
MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT, a California
irrigation district,

27
Counter Defendant.
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING DECEMBER 13,2012 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

STIPULATION

1
2

Whereas, on September 5, 2012, the District initiated this proceeding by filing its complaint

3

for declaratory relief, pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Pro. § 1060, in the Superior Court for Merced

4

County, California.

5
6

Whereas, on October 5, 2012, the County removed this action by notice pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1441, and filed its answer and counterclaim to the District’s complaint.

7

Whereas, by entry dated October 17, 2012, Magistrate Judge Oberto set a scheduling

8

conference in this proceeding for December 13, 2012, and directed the parties to submit their

9

scheduling report no later than December 6, 2012.

10

Whereas, on November 2, 2012, the District moved, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), to

11

remand this action to the Superior Court. The District also moved, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

12

Procedure 12(b)(1), to dismiss the County’s counterclaim. The motion to remand is scheduled to be

13

heard on December 12, 2012, and hearing on the motion to dismiss has been deferred pending ruling

14

on the motion to remand.

15
16
17

Whereas, the parties wish to avoid the cost of preparing for and appearing at the December
13, 2012 scheduling conference unless and until the Court were to deny the motion to remand.
Based on the foregoing, the Parties stipulate to defer the Rule 26 scheduling meeting, the

18

exchange of Rule 26 disclosures, the joint scheduling report to the Court, and the Scheduling

19

Conference presently set for December 13, 2012 pending the Court’s hearing and ruling on the

20

pending motion to remand. The parties further request the Court to set an adjourned date for the

21

scheduling conference no earlier than 60 days after entry of an order ruling on the motion to remand,

22

with the parties’ Rule 26(a)(1) and (2) disclosures due within 14 days thereafter, the parties’ Rule

23

26(f) conference to have been completed no later than 21 days prior thereto and the parties’ report on

24

their Rule 26(f) conference due no later than seven calendar days prior to the scheduling conference.

25

The Parties further agree that this stipulation may be executed in counterparts.

26
27
28
2
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING DECEMBER 13,2012 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

1

Dated: November 19, 2012

WANGER JONES HELSLEY PC
By:

2
3
4

/s/ Oliver W. Wanger
Oliver W. Wanger
Kurt F. Vote
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter Claimant
County of Mariposa

5
6
Dated: November 19, 2012

DUANE MORRIS LLP

7
By: /s/ Jolie-Anne Ansley
Thomas M. Berliner
Jolie-Anne Ansley
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter Defendant
Merced Irrigation District

8
9
10
11
Dated: November 19, 2012

DUNCAN & ALLEN

12
By: /s/ John P. Coyle
John P. Coyle
Abby C. Briggerman
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter Defendant
Merced Irrigation District

13
14
15
16

ORDER
17
Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the Court continues the December 13, 2012, Scheduling

18
19

Conference to April 2, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. The parties’ Rule 26(f) conference shall be completed no

20

later than March 12, 2013; the parties’ report on their Rule 26(f) conference shall be filed no later

21

than March 26, 2013; and the parties’ Rule 26(a)(1) and (2) disclosures shall be served no later than

22

April 16, 2013.

23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
Dated:

26

November 21, 2012

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DEAC_Signature-END:

27
ie14hje
28
3
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING DECEMBER 13,2012 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE