California Clovis, LLC v. COMM 2006-C8 Shaw Avenue Clovis LLC et al

Filing 53

ORDER GRANTING 52 Stipulation to Amend Opposition and Reply Dates for Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/28/2021. (Marrujo, C)

4

Whitney, Thompson & Jeffcoach LLP
Marshall C. Whitney, #82952
Mandy L. Jeffcoach, #232313
8050 N. Palm Avenue, Suite 110
Fresno, California 93711
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

5

Attorneys for Plaintiff CALIFORNIA CLOVIS, LLC

1
2
3

6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CALIFORNIA CLOVIS, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15
16

Case No. 1:19-cv-00962-NONE-SKO

v.
SIERRA VISTA REALTY LLC, a California
limited liability company; SIERRA VISTA CH
LLC, a California limited liability company;
SIERRA VISTA NASSIM LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 25,
inclusive,

17

STIPULATION TO AMEND
OPPOSITION AND REPLY DATES
FOR MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER

Defendants.

18
19
20
21
22

WHEREAS, the Court issued a Scheduling Order on November 7, 2019, pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 16 (Dkt. 22);
WHEREAS, on May 4, 2020, the Court modified the scheduling order given the ongoing
impact of the pandemic (Dkt. 32);

2

WHEREAS, on August 11, 2020, the parties filed a stipulation to amend the scheduling order

25

based on Plaintiff’s principal’s advanced cancer diagnosis and related treatment, which rendered him

26

unable to sit for a deposition until mid to late October of 2020 and unable to travel (Dkt. 35);

27
28

WHEREAS, on August 13, 2020, the Court entered an amended scheduling order to
accommodate Plaintiff’s principal’s condition and treatment. The Court also set the trial date for
June 29, 2021 (Dkt. 36);
125.0 05547143.000

1
STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER;
CASE NO. 1:19-CV-00962-NONE-SKO

WHEREAS, on November 6, 2020, the Court entered an amended scheduling order to allow

1
2

the parties to complete depositions in this matter and to ensure that the trial date in this matter does

3

not conflict with one of Defendants’ lead trial attorney’s expected maternity leave (Dkt. 41);
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2021, the Court entered an amended scheduling order with respect

4
5

to the deadline for the parties to file their dispositive motions in this case (Dkt. 43);
WHEREAS, on March 30, 2021, the Court entered an amended scheduling order with respect

6
7

to the deadline for the parties to file their dispositive motions in this case (Dkt. 46);
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2021, Defendants filed their Motion for Summary Judgment and

8
9

Plaintiff’s opposition is presently due on May 5, 2021;
WHEREAS, on April 27, 2021, Plaintiff’s counsel learned that her client’s principal was

10
11

involved in a serious accident and has been hospitalized. As Plaintiff’s principal, Brad Hoyt, is

12

necessary to complete the Opposition and his present date of discharge is anticipated to be sometime

13

during the week of May 3-7, 2021. Given the dispositive nature of the pending motion, Mr. Hoyt

14

needs to be able to review the opposition and submit a timely declaration;
WHEREAS the parties submit that the above matters constitute good cause to extend the

15
16

deadlines relevant to the dispositive motions by ten (10) days;
WHEREAS, the parties stipulate and respectfully request that the Court enter the following

17
18

amended scheduling order in the above-referenced case:
1.

Plaintiff’s Opposition to the dispositive shall be filed on or before May 14,

21

2.

Defendants’ Reply shall be due on or before May 26, 2021;

22

3.

A hearing on the dispositive motion shall take place on June 2, 20211.

19
20

2021;

2
25
26
27
28

1
Undersigned counsel understand that, pursuant to this Court’s Order Unassigning District Judge (ECF No. 27)
and the accompanying Standing Order in Light of Ongoing Judicial Emergency in the Eastern District of California
(ECF No. 27-1), no hearing will be held on any non-dispositive or dispositive motion absent a further order of this Court.
(See ECF No. 27-1 at § B.) The parties nonetheless provide the hearing date contained herein, which they understand
will govern the briefing schedule pursuant to Local Rule 230.

125.0 05547143.000

2
STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER;
CASE NO. 1:19-CV-00962-NONE-SKO

1
2
Dated: April 28, 2021

DUANE MORRIS LLP

3
4

By: /s/ Elinor H. Murarova
Elinor H. Murarova
Allison M. Midei
Meagen E. Leary
B. Alexandra Jones
Attorneys for COMM 2006-C8 SHAW AVENUE
CLOVIS LLC and LNR PARTNERS
CALIFORNIA MANAGER, LLC

5
6
7
8
9
10

Dated: April 28, 2021

WHITNEY, THOMPSON & JEFFCOACH LLP

11

By: /s/ Mandy L. Jeffcoach
Marshall C. Whitney
Mandy L. Jeffcoach
Attorneys for CALIFORNIA CLOVIS, LLC

12
13
14

[PROPOSED] ORDER
15
16
17
18

Good cause having been shown (see Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4)), the parties’ joint request to
modify the case schedule (Doc. No. 46) is GRANTED as follows:
Dispositive Motion Deadlines:

19

Opposition filing: May 14, 2021

20

Reply filing: May 26, 2021

21

All other dates in the case (see Doc. No. 41) shall remain in place.

22
2
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 28, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

26
27
28

125.0 05547143.000

3
STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER;
CASE NO. 1:19-CV-00962-NONE-SKO