Mendez Garcia v. City of Madera et al

Filing 49

Order Granting Stipulation Re: Modification Of Scheduling Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/17/2015. (Yu, L)

1
2
3
4
5

LAZARO SALAZAR, SBN 234183
SALAZAR & COOK, LLP
252 N. Fulton Street
Fresno, California 93701
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiff Victoriano Mendez-Garcia

6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VICTORIANO MENDEZ-GARCIA

12
Plaintiff
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

v.
Case No. 1:13-CV-01793-MJS
CITY OF MADERA, CITY OF MADERA
POLICE DEPARTMENT, MADERA
POLICE OFFICER JOSH CHAVEZ
(BADGE NO. 3509), DHS, US AGENCY;
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
A Sovereign Nation acting by and through
Its Agency, The Department of Homeland
Security.

JOINT STIPULATION RE MODIFICATION
OF SCHEDULING ORDER

Defendants
________________________________

22
23

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

24

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND AMONG THE PARTIES TO THIS ACTION by and

25

through their attorneys of record herein as follows:

26
_________________

27
28

JOINT STIPULATION RE MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER

1

1.

After a Motion to Dismiss was brought against the First Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff,

2

which named The Department of Homeland Security (herein “DHS”), an agency of the United

3

States government, as one of the defendants in this action, DHS moved for an order dismissing this

4

action as against it on the grounds, among other arguments, that there is no statutory exception for

5

permitting an action to be brought against an agency of the United States for the actions or

6
7

omissions alleged, and it was not the proper federal defendant, if any.

8

2. By Stipulation of the parties, Plaintiff ultimately filed a Second Amended Complaint, on January

9

20, 2015, naming the United States as a party defendant, and deleting any reference to DHS as a

10
11
12

party defendant.
3. The Summons on the Second Amended Complaint has been served in accordance with the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, after first confirming with counsel for DHS that he was not authorized to

13
14

accept service of the Second Amended Complaint on behalf of the United States.

15

4. As a result of the delay in resolving the pleading issues, the parties have engaged in full discovery.

16

Plaintiff and Madera Defendants have made appropriate discovery disclosures in accordance with

17

the Rules and formal written discovery requests were exchanged. Deposition discovery has not

18

occurred because of the pending presence, of the United States and Agent Quintero as parties to

19
20
21

the litigation.
5. Given the time necessary for the formal response of the United States, and the probable

22

participation of the United States in discovery, the Plaintiff and Madera defendants hereby request

23

that the court modify its Scheduling Conference Order (Document Number 11) extend the time

24

within which to complete non-expert discovery to be extended to and including April 17, 2015 and

25

that the time within which to disclosure experts be extended to be completed by July 17, 2015. The

26
_________________

27
28

JOINT STIPULATION RE MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER

1

parties that the trial date of December 8, 2015 will be retained.

2
3

I agree to all of the above.

4

Dated: February 13, 2015

5

________/s/Lazaro Salazar_______________
Lazaro Salazar
Attorney for Plaintiff, Victoriano Mendez-Garcia

6
7
8

I agree to all of the above.
Dated: February 13, 2015

9
10

_____ /s/Gregory L. Myers__________________
Gregory L. Myers
Attorney for Defendants City of Madera, City of
Madera Police Department and Officer Josh Chavez

11
12
13

Order

14
15

Good cause appearing based on the above STIPULATION RE MODIFICATION OF

16
17
18

SCHEDULING ORDER in Case No. 1:13-CV-01793-MJS is accepted and adopted as the Order
of this Court.

19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22

Dated:

February 17, 2015

/s/

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
_________________

27
28

JOINT STIPULATION RE MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER