Ghuman v. United States of America

Filing 12

STIPULATION and ORDER 11 to Continue Settlement Conference and Discovery Deadlines, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 6/19/2017. Settlement Conference CONTINUED to 1/8/2018 at 09:30 AM in Bakersfield, 510 19th Street before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Hall, S)

Download PDF
1 PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney 2 VICTORIA L. BOESCH Assistant United States Attorney 3 501 I Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, CA 95814 4 Telephone: (916) 554-2700 Facsimile: (916) 554-2900 5 victoria.boesch@usdoj.gov 6 Attorneys for the United States 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 KULVEER K. GHUMAN, CASE NO. 1:16-CV-1443-DAD-JLT Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Defendant. STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND DISCOVERY DEADLINES (Doc. 11) 15 16 Plaintiff Kulveer K. Ghuman and Defendant United States of America respectfully request that 17 the Court continue the settlement conference currently scheduled for August 4, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. to 18 September 8, 2017. This will give the parties an opportunity to finish some key discovery that will 19 render settlement discussions more productive. Rescheduling the settlement conference for this date 20 would make Plaintiff’s written itemization of damages and meaningful settlement demand that includes 21 a brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate due to Defendant on August 18, 2017. 22 Defendant’s response of either acceptance or a meaningful counteroffer that includes a brief explanation 23 of why such a settlement is appropriate would be due to Plaintiff on August 25, 2017. The parties 24 would have to submit confidential settlement conference statements by email to Judge Thurston by 25 September 1, 2017. Defendant also requests that the Court permit agency counsel representing the 26 Department of Health and Human Services, who is located in the District of Columbia, to attend the 27 settlement conference by telephone. 28 STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE & DISCOVERY DEADLINES 30 PAGE 1 Because of scheduling conflicts, the parties also respectfully request the following minor 1 2 adjustments to the case schedule. These adjustments will not affect the trial and pretrial dates set by the 3 Court. 4 Event Current Date Proposed New Date July 28, 2017 August 11, 2017 August 11, 2017 August 25, 2017 September 8, 2017 September 22, 2017 5 6 Fact Discovery Cut Off 7 8 Plaintiff Expert Disclosure 9 Defendant Expert Disclosure 10 11 12 Respectfully submitted, PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney 13 14 Dated: June 15, 2017 15 By: 16 /s/ Victoria L. Boesch VICTORIA L. BOESCH Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for the United States LEVY LAW FIRM 17 18 Dated: June 15, 2017 19 20 21 By: /s/ Dane Levy (authorized 6/15/17) DANE LEVY Dane Levy, Esq. Bjorn Burlin, Esq. Levy Law Firm Attorneys for Plaintiff Kulveer K. Ghuman ORDER 22 The stipulation to amend the case schedule is GRANTED in PART as follows: 23 1. All non-expert discovery SHALL be completed no later than August 11, 2017; 24 2. Plaintiff SHALL disclose his experts no later than August 25, 2017 and Defendant 25 SHALL disclose its experts no later than September 22, 2017. Plaintiff SHALL disclose rebuttal 26 experts, if any, no later than October 13, 2017; 27 3. The settlement conference is CONTINUED to January 8, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. The 28 STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE & DISCOVERY DEADLINES 30 PAGE 2 1 deadlines set forth in the scheduling order (Doc. 8 at 6-7) remain in effect. 2 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 19, 2017 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE & DISCOVERY DEADLINES 30 PAGE 3

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?