Barkett, et al. v. Sentosa Properties LLC, et al.

Filing 58

ORDER GRANTING 57 Stipulation to Continue the Mandatory Scheduling Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 3/12/2015. Initial Scheduling Conference CONTINUED to 5/1/2015 at 08:30 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

ELIZABETH A. SPERLING (State Bar No. 231474)
JESSICA L. SHARRON (State Bar No. 251702)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
333 South Hope Street, Sixteenth Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
SENTOSA PROPERTIES LLC, a Washington
limited liability company, and Specially Appearing
Defendants EUGENE WONG, ARNOLD HUANG
AND ELIZABETH HUANG
DAVID M. GILMORE (State Bar No. 105429)
STEPHEN D. BLEA (State Bar No. 294339)
GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER
P.O. Box 28907
Fresno, CA 93729-8907
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

15
16
17

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
WILLIAM BARKETT, MONTEREY FINANCIAL
ADVISORS LLC, WASCO INVESTMENTS LLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - FRESNO DIVISION

19
20
21

WILLIAM BARKETT, MONTEREY
FINANCIAL ADVISORS LLC, WASCO
INVESTMENTS LLC,
Plaintiffs,

22
23
24
25

v.

Case No.: 1:14-CV-1698-LJO-JLT
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO
CONTINUE THE MANDATORY
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
(Doc. 57)

SENTOSA PROPERTIES LLC, ARNOLD
HUANG,
Defendants.

26

Plaintiffs William Barkett, Monterey Financial Advisors, LLC, and Wasco

27

Investments LLC (collectively “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Sentosa Properties LLC and

28

Arnold Huang (collectively “Defendants”) (Plaintiffs and Defendants shall be referred to
7828-54\00316227.000

1

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE COURT’S MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; INITIAL
DISCLOSURES; AND CORRESPONDING DATES
LEGAL02/35322597v2

1

herein collectively as the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of record named

2

herein, hereby stipulate as follows:

3
4

On October 20, 2014, the Court issued an Order Setting Mandatory Scheduling
Conference in this action (the “Scheduling Order”);

5

Pursuant to the Scheduling Order, the Court ordered the parties, or their counsel, to

6

appear for a formal scheduling conference on February 13, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. before

7

Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston, at the United States District Court located at 510 19th

8

Street, Bakersfield, California (the “Scheduling Conference”);

9
10
11
12

On November 5, 2014, Defendant Sentosa Properties, LLC (“Sentosa”) filed a Motion
to Dismiss (Docket (“DKT”) No. 9);
On December 1, 2014, Specially Appearing Defendant WF Capital, Inc. (“WF
Capital”) filed a motion to dismiss (DKT No. 19);

13

As a result of the pending motions to dismiss, the Parties stipulated to continue the

14

Scheduling Conference, and the deadlines to file the Joint Scheduling Report and make the

15

initial disclosures required by Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 26”)

16

(DKT 46);

17

On January 26, 2015, the Court granted the Parties’ request and continued the

18

Scheduling Conference to March 31, 2015 (DKT 47), making the Joint Scheduling Report

19

and the Rule 26 initial disclosures due on March 24, 2015;

20

On February 5, 2015, the Court issued its Order on the Motions to Dismiss and

21

granted the Motions in part, including dismissals with prejudice as to the previously-named

22

Defendants Elizabeth Huang, Eugene Wong, and WF Capital, and granted Plaintiffs leave to

23

amend their fraud claim as against Defendants Sentosa and Arnold Huang only (DKT 52);

24

Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint on March 9, 2015, (DKT 55) which

25

Plaintiffs contend addresses the issues raised by the Court in its Orders on the Motions to

26

Dismiss;

27
28

Since the First Amended Complaint was filed on March 9, 2015, Defendants are not
obligated to respond to the pleading until March 26, 2015; and
7828-54\00316227.000

2

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE COURT’S MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; INITIAL
DISCLOSURES; AND CORRESPONDING DATES
LEGAL02/35322597v2

1

On March 10, 2015, the parties met and conferred regarding the timing of the

2

Scheduling Conference, the Joint Scheduling Report, and the Rule 26 initial disclosures. In

3

light of the fact that Defendants’ response to the First Amended Complaint is not yet due,

4

and the pleadings are yet unsettled, the Parties agree that it is most efficient and appropriate

5

to continue the Scheduling Conference until after the pleadings are settled, and to continue

6

the deadlines for submission of the Joint Scheduling Report and exchange of the Rule 26

7

initial disclosures accordingly, to permit Defendants to respond to the First Amended

8

Complaint, and for the Court to rule on any responsive motion Defendants file.

9

The parties hereby stipulate, through their respective counsel of record, that the Court

10

(1) take the Scheduling Conference currently set for March 31, 2015, off calendar, (2) set a

11

new date for the Scheduling Conference after the pleadings are settled, and (3) continue the

12

deadlines for the Meet and Confer Conference, the submission of the Joint Scheduling

13

Report, and the making of the Initial Disclosures to later dates which shall be determined,

14

per the Scheduling Order and Rule 26, based on the date ultimately set for the continued

15

Scheduling Conference.

16

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

17
18

DATED: March _, 2015

19

Respectfully submitted,
ELIZABETH A. SPERLING
JESSICA L. SHARRON
ALSTON & BIRD LLP

20
21

/s/ Jessica L. Sharron
Jessica L. Sharron
Attorneys for Defendant SENTOSA PROPERTIES LLC, a
Washington limited liability company, and Specially
Appearing Defendants ARNOLD HUANG,

22
23
24
25

DATED: March , 2015

Respectfully submitted,

27

DAVID M. GILMORE
STEPHEN D. BLEA
GILMORE MAGNESS LEIFER

28

/s/ David M. Gilmore

26

7828-54\00316227.000

3

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE COURT’S MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; INITIAL
DISCLOSURES; AND CORRESPONDING DATES
LEGAL02/35322597v2

David M. Gilmore
Attorneys for Plaintiffs WILLIAM BARKETT,
MONTEREY FINANCIAL ADVISORS LLC; WASCO
INVESTMENTS LLC

1
2
3
4

ORDER
As noted above, the parties seek to continue the scheduling conference to allow the pleadings

5

to become settled. They also seek to continue the deadline for the initial disclosures and

6

“corresponding dates.” However, it is the practice of the Court to set the deadline for making the

7

initial disclosures at the scheduling conference, unless the parties have agreed to an earlier date.

8

(Doc. 2 at 4 [The parties joint statement is to propose “[a] for the exchange of initial disclosures

9

required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1) or a statement that disclosures have already been exchanged.”]

10

Thus, to the extent the parties have conducted their Rule 26(f) conference and, thereby, “started the

11

clock” for making their initial disclosures, they are relieved of that obligation until the time of the

12

scheduling conference unless they otherwise agree. The parties do not identify the “corresponding

13

dates” they contend need be expressly addressed by this order. Therefore, the Court ORDERS:

14

1.

The mandatory scheduling conference is continued to May 1, 2015 at 8:30 a.m. The

15

parties are relieved of their obligation to make their Rule 26 initial disclosure until the Court sets a

16

date to do so or they may agree as to a date prior, if they choose.

17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 12, 2015

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7828-54\00316227.000

4

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE COURT’S MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE; INITIAL
DISCLOSURES; AND CORRESPONDING DATES
LEGAL02/35322597v2