Kevin Smith v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Filing
20
STIPULATION and ORDER 19 to set Motion Hearing signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 7/29/2013. Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company to file it Motion for Summary Judgment so that Hearing will 10/3/2013. (Marciel, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
MICHAEL L. WHITCOMB, ESQ. (SBN: 86744)
BRIAN W. PLUMMER, ESQ. (SBN: 240210)
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
Law Department
10031 Foothills Boulevard, Suite 200
Roseville, CA 95747
General:
(916) 789-6400
Direct:
(916) 789-6237
Facsimile: (916) 789-6227
E-Mail:
bplummer@up.com
Attorneys for Defendant
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
KEVIN SMITH,
13
Plaintiff,
14
15
Case No.: 2:12-CV-00656-TLN-CKD
vs.
ORDER RE: STIPULATION TO SET
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
HEARING DATE
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY,
16
Defendant.
17
18
19
Having reviewed the Stipulation submitted by the parties and the Status (PreTrial Scheduling) Order, the Court orders that:
20
1.
There is good cause for Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company to
21
file its Motion for Summary Judgment after the time limit prescribed in the Status
22
(Pre-Trial Scheduling) Order;
23
24
2.
Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company may file its Motion for
Summary Judgment so that the hearing on this motion will be October 3, 2013.
25
3.
All other Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will apply to the motion and
26
Plaintiff’s responsive documents.
27
///
28
///
-1____________________________________________________________________________________
Order Re: Stipulation to Set Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing Date
1
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 29, 2013
3
4
5
6
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2____________________________________________________________________________________
Order Re: Stipulation to Set Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing Date
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?