Ervin et al v. Omnicare, Inc.

Filing 55

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 12/4/17 EXTEDNING Discovery cut off date to 4/28/2018. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Jennifer B. Zargarof (SBN 204382)
[e-mail]
Aimee G. Mackay (SBN 221690)
[e-mail]
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
555 West 5th St., Suite 4000
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
OMNICARE, INC., a corporation

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DARLENE ERVIN,

12
13

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.

14
15
16

OMNICARE, INC., a corporation,
Defendant.

17
18
19

Civ. No. 2:13-cv-0146-MCE-KJN
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND
DISCOVERY CUT OFF BY 90 DAYS;
ORDER THEREON

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CUT OFF; ORDER
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-0146-MCE-KJN

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Rule 6-144, and this
Court’s Initial Scheduling Order, Plaintiff Darlene Ervin (“Plaintiff” or “Ervin”) and Defendant
Omnicare, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Omnicare”) (together, “the Parties”), through their respective
counsel of record, hereby stipulate that the Parties would benefit from an extension of the discovery
cut off in this action, and therefore respectfully request that this Court issue an order extending the
time to complete discovery. In support of their Stipulation, the Parties state as follows:
WHEREAS, This Court’s Initial Scheduling Order sets the deadline for discovery cut off in
this case at three hundred and sixty five days from the date of the Second Amended Complaint.
(ECF 48);
WHEREAS, The Second Amended Complaint was served on January 10, 2017 (ECF 46),
making the discovery cut off in this case January 10, 2018;
WHEREAS, The Parties have been actively engaged in discovery in this matter, endeavoring
to complete discovery before the Court’s deadline. Defendant served Special Interrogatories and
Requests for Production. Plaintiff responded to those Requests, and is in the process of locating and
producing responsive documents. Plaintiff served Special Interrogatories, Requests for Production
and Requests for Admission. Defendant responded to those Requests, and the Parties have been
meeting and conferring over the scope of those requests while Defendant is in the process of rolling
out production of documents. Defendant’s document production has taken the parties longer than
they anticipated while they negotiated a stipulated protective order; have met and conferred over
perceived deficiencies; and while Plaintiff and Defendant worked to resolve a technical issue that
prevented Plaintiff from being able to access Defendant’s electronic production;
WHEREAS, the Parties also noticed depositions, with the intention of completing the process
before the discovery cut off. Defendant has noticed Plaintiff’s deposition; and Plaintiff has noticed
the deposition of various Omnicare witnesses. Due to the delay in document production, however,
these depositions could not be noticed until recently;

26
27
28

1
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CUT OFF; ORDER
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-0146-MCE-KJN

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

WHEREAS, unexpectedly, the depositions on both sides had to be taken off calendar
because Ms. Ervin experienced a medical condition requiring surgery and a six to eight week
recovery period. Ms. Ervin is still recovering from that surgery. Defendant’s lead trial counsel,
Jennifer Zargarof, also had a medical condition requiring surgery, which took place on November
27, 2017 and which will entail an expected three week recovery period;
WHEREAS, as a result of these unforeseen circumstances, the Parties will be unable to
complete the depositions in this case until after the January 10, 2018 discovery cut off. The Parties
are aware that the Court’s standing order indicates that “unavailability” generically does not
constitute good cause for moving a deadline; but the Parties believe that the circumstances here are
unique (given that both sides experienced unexpected medical emergencies that have rendered
Plaintiff and Defendant’s lead counsel both presently unable to participate in the case) and go
beyond generic unavailability;
WHEREAS, additionally, the Parties also wish to explore potential mediation of this case.
However, due to the same circumstances described above, they have been unable to put the case in a
position for mediation. The Parties’ request to move the discovery cut off would also allow them
time to set and participate in a potential mediation.

17
18
19
20
21
22

NOW THEREFORE, the Parties have stipulated and agreed as follows, subject to approval
by the Court:
1.

That the discovery cut off in this case be moved ninety (90) days to April 28, 2018.

Dated: December 1, 2017

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP

23
24
25
26

By: /s/ Aimee G. Mackay
Jennifer B. Zargarof
Aimee G. Mackay
Attorneys for Defendant
OMNICARE, INC., a corporation

27
28

2
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CUT OFF; ORDER
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-0146-MCE-KJN

1

Dated: December 1, 2017

THYBERGLAW

2
3

By: /s/ Gregory A. Thyberg (as authorized Dec. 1, 2017)
Gregory A. Thyberg
Attorneys for Plaintiff
DARLENE ERVIN

4
5
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 4, 2017

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
ACTIVE 220881739

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CUT OFF; ORDER
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-0146-MCE-KJN