Mugrauer et al v. Modesto et al

Filing 18

ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLETE VOLUNTARY DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM (VDRP) UNDER LOCAL RULE 271. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulated Request is granted, as set forth in the Stipulation above: the deadline within which to hold the VDRP session shall be extended to February 22, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/10/2016. (Hernandez, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PATRICIA MUGRAUER and WADE
MUGRAUER,

)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
vs.
)
CITY OF MODESTO, a municipal
)
corporation, Modesto Police Department Chief )
GALEN CARROLL, in his Individual and
)
Official Capacities, Modesto Police Officer
)
JOHN C. LEE, Individually, and DOES 1
)
through 50, Jointly and Severally,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)

Case No. 1:16-cv-00480-AWI-SAB
ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND
TIME TO COMPLETE VOLUNTARY
DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM
(VDRP) UNDER LOCAL RULE 271
(ECF No. 17)

The parties respectfully submit the following Stipulation and Proposed Order:
STIPULATION
WHEREAS, the parties to the above-entitled action have agreed to participate in the

19

Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program (“VDRP”) and were referred to the program on July 5,

20

2016 (Dkt. 15). The parties selected a neutral from the list provided, one James R. Kirby II,

21

Esq., and, once the parties were contacted by Mr. Kirby, a session was ultimately scheduled for

22

September 28, 2016. Counsel for the parties met-and-conferred on numerous occasions after

23

the date of the referral during the intervening time period leading up to the scheduled session,

24

and the issues in the case were discussed. Unfortunately, it became apparent after the exchange

25

of information that the City of Modesto Defendants would not be able to meaningfully engage
in the VDRP mediation session until certain discovery was conducted, namely, a defense

1

1

medical exam of Plaintiff Patricia Mugrauer. The parties decided to postpone the session until

2

it could be held in a meaningful way, in order to avoid a wasted session, including both the

3

session time and the travel time expended for counsel and the parties to attend a session in

4

Sacramento, where Mr. Kirby’s office is located; counsel for Plaintiff would be traveling from

5

San Francisco and Oakland, while Plaintiffs would be traveling from Modesto, and counsel for

6

– and – Defendants would be traveling from Oakland and Modesto, respectively.
Local Rule 271(j)(1) provides, in relevant part that: “the session shall be held as soon as

7

reasonably possible, but no more than ninety-one (91) days after the Neutral is selected, unless
8

otherwise ordered by the Court[.]” Here, the VDRP session has not yet been held and will be
9

held outside of these temporal parameters. The parties have met-and-conferred, however, and
10

are aware of the general nature of the case and the issues presented. Additionally, key
11
12

documents have been exchanged. The parties still wish to make a good faith effort at
participating in VDRP. In the meantime, the parties have been and will continue to engage in

13

discovery. Thus, extending the time period within which to complete VDRP under Local Rule

14

271(j)(1) will advance the central purposes of Local Rule 271.

15

Additionally, the current Scheduling Order (Dkt. 13) sets February 15, 2017 as the

16

deadline for Expert Disclosures. The parties hope to complete the VDRP session well in

17

advance of the exchange of Expert Disclosures, but if that cannot be done or if such disclosures

18

are needed for a productive VDRP session to occur, an appropriate deadline by which to hold

19

the VDRP session would be one week after this Expert Disclosures deadline, on February 22,

20
21
22

2017.
Accordingly, based on the circumstances described above, the parties respectfully and
jointly request that the Court issue a further order, extending the deadline within which to hold
the VDRP session to February 22, 2017.

23

WHEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE and respectfully request that
24

the deadline within which to hold the VDRP session be extended to February 22, 2017.
25

All other deadlines and the Pretrial Conference and Trial dates would remain as set for the

2

1

time being, as discovery progresses.

2

Dated: November 10, 2016

LAW OFFICE OF SANJAY S. SCHMIDT
and
LAW OFFICES OF PANOS LAGOS

3
4
5

/s/ Sanjay S. Schmidt
By: SANJAY S. SCHMIDT
Attorneys for Plaintiff

6
7

Respectfully Submitted,

Dated: November 10, 2016

8

Respectfully Submitted,
MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON

9

/s/ Blake P. Loebs
By: BLAKE P. LOEBS
Attorneys for Defendants,
CITY OF MODESTO, GALEN CARROLL,
and JOHN C. LEE

10
11
12
13

ORDER

14
15
16

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulated
Request is granted, as set forth in the Stipulation above: the deadline within which to hold the
VDRP session shall be extended to February 22, 2017.

17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 10, 2016
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25

3