Smith v. City of Modesto et al

Filing 28

Order Continuing Pre-Trial Dates, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 07/27/2015. (Yu, L)

Download PDF
1 5 .3 Susan E. Coleman (SBN 171832) E-mail: scoleman@bwslaw.com Nathan A. Oyster (SBN 225307) E-mail: noyster@bwslaw.com BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP 444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2953 Tel: 213.236.0600; Fax: 213.236.2700 6 Attorneys for Defendants 7 Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF MODESTO, OFFICER DAVID WATSON and OFFICER RANDALL W. BOLINGER 2 3 4 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 JACK SMITH, 14 Case No. 1:14-cv-01285-LJO-MJS Plaintiff, ORDER CONTINUING PRE-TRIAL DATES 15 v. 16 CITY OF MODESTO, a municipal corporation; Modesto Police Department Officers DAVID WATSON (#11078) and RANDALL W. BOLINGER (#10069), individually; and DOES 1 through 50, Jointly and Severally, 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B URKE , W ILLIAMS & S ORENS EN , LLP ATTO RNEY S AT LAW LOS A NG EL ES Hon. Michael J. Seng Defendants. GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, based on the stipulation of the parties: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following deadlines are modified: Deadline Prior Date New Date Non-Expert Discovery September 14, 2015 November 16, 2015 Expert Discovery November 30, 2015 January 29, 2016 Expert Disclosure October 13, 2015 December 14, 2015 Supp. Expert Disclosure November 17, 2015 January 11, 2016 CAPTION 1:14-CV-01285-LJO-MJS [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING PRETRIAL DATES 1 2 The motion deadlines, pre-trial, and trial dates set forth in the Court’s Scheduling Order [Doc. No. 16] remain unchanged. 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 27, 2015 /s/ Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B URKE , W ILLIAMS & S ORENS EN , LLP ATTO RNEY S AT LAW LOS A NG EL ES -2- CAPTION 1:14-CV-01285-LJO-MJS [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING PRETRIAL DATES

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?