Valley Fine Foods Company, Inc. v. Buona Vita, Inc.

Filing 18

STIPULATION and ORDER amending the scheduling order to extent discovery deadlines only, signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/5/15. Non-Expert discovery due 8/24/15. Plaintiff's expert disclosures due 9/7/15. Defendant's expert disclosures due 9/21/15. Rebuttal expert disclosures due 9/28/15. Expert discovery due 10/28/15. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Michael C. Robinson (Bar No. 120308) mrobinson@rdwlaw.com George K. Rosenstock (Bar No .117515) grosenstock@rdwlaw.com ROBINSON DI LANDO 800 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 750 Los Angeles, California 90017-2687 Telephone (213) 229-0100 Facsimile: (213) 229-0101 Attorneys for Plaintiff VALLEY FINE FOODS COMPANY, INC Todd A. Jones (Bar No. 198024) tjones@archernorris.com Chad D. Greeson (Bar No. 251928) cgreeson@archernorris.com ARCHER NORRIS 301 University Avenue, Suite 110 Sacramento, CA 95825-5537 Telephone: 916.646.2480 Facsimile: 916.646.5696 Attorneys for Defendant BUONA VITA, INC., a New Jersey corporation 14 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 17 18 19 VALLEY FINE FOODS COMPANY, INC. a California corporation, Plaintiff, 20 21 v. 22 BUONA VITA, INC., a New Jersey corporation and DOES 1 through 10, 23 Defendants. Case No. 2:13-CV-01356-CKD STIPULATION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES ONLY; DECLARATION OF MICHAEL C. ROBINSON AND ORDER Removal Date: July 8, 2013 Trial Date: January 11, 2016 Magistrate Judge: Carolyn K. Delaney 24 25 26 This Stipulation to modify only discovery deadlines set forth in the Court’s 27 Second Scheduling Order (Docket No. 16) as follows is made between Plaintiff 28 VALLEY FINE FOOD COMPANY, INC. (hereinafter “VALLEY”) on the one ZA185/2164576-1 STIPULATION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER 2:13-CV-01356-KJM-CKD 1 hand and Defendant BUONA VITA, INC. (hereinafter “BV”) on the other hand 2 (Plaintiff and Defendant hereinafter collectively referred to as the “PARTIES”) 3 with respect to the following recital of fact: 4 RECITALS: 5 1. The discovery cutoff for non-expert discovery is now set for July 8, 2015, 6 based upon the Revised Court’s Scheduling Order dated January 27, 2015 7 (Docket No. 16). 8 9 2. The case is set for trial January 11, 2016 in courtroom No. 24 before United States Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney 10 3. The Pre-Trial Conference is set for November 4, 2015 at 11:00 a.m. in 11 courtroom No. 24 before United States Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. 12 Delaney. 13 4. The PARTIES have met and conferred over depositions of Parties, party- 14 affiliated witnesses and third-party witnesses and it appears that due to the 15 location of various witnesses and their status as former employees, as well 16 as the location of various third-party fact witnesses in the Mid-West, it 17 will be impossible to conduct all necessary depositions before the non- 18 expert discovery cutoff, currently set for July 8, 2015 (See Declaration of 19 Michael C. Robinson, ¶ 2. filed herewith and incorporated by reference 20 herein.) 21 5. Plaintiff is in negotiation with Defendant to arrange for key/employee 22 party affiliates witnesses located in and around New Jersey, as well as 23 multiple categories of Persons Most Knowledgeable depositions of 24 Defendant BV, whose relevance has become apparent during the recent 25 completion of depositions of Plaintiff’s officers and employees in Walnut 26 Creek, California. This will require meetings between defense counsel 27 and the deponents in advance of any depositions to inquire as to the scope 28 of areas of responsibility regarding areas of testimony in the Rule 30(b(6) ZA185/2164576-1 2 STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER 2:13-CV-01356-KJM-CKD 1 deposition and further negotiation to possibly consolidate witnesses as the 2 persons most qualified in more than one area of responsibility. 3 6. The PARTIES have met and conferred and agree that it makes sense to 4 request that the Court extend all discovery cutoff by 45 days, while 5 maintaining other dates at the continued convenience to the Court’s 6 schedule, to allow sufficient discovery and trial preparation. 7 7. The PARTIES continue to discuss the potential for settlement discussion 8 in advance of the Pre-Trial Conference date, but must complete non- 9 expert discovery before settlement discussions can be fruitful. 10 8. The current case schedule and the proposed new dates are as follows: 11 July 8, 2015: Non-Expert Discovery Completion Date (proposed new 12 date: August 24, 2015); 13 July 24, 2015: Plaintiff’s Expert Disclosures Completed (proposed new 14 date: September 7, 2015); 15 August 5, 2015: Defendant’s Expert Disclosures Completed (proposed 16 new date: September 21, 2015); 17 August 13, 2015: Rebuttal Expert Disclosures Completed (proposed new 18 date: September 28, 2015); 19 September 11, 2015: Expert discovery Completed (proposed new date: 20 October 28, 2015); 21 All other dates to remain as set forth in the Court’s Revised Scheduling 22 Order. 23 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED: 24 1. The PARTIES respectfully request that the Court continue the dates as set 25 forth above but to maintain all other dates previously set by the Court in 26 the Revised Court Scheduling Order. 27 28 2. No PARTY will use this continuance as a basis for seeking a further continuance of any other pretrial deadline or the trial of this matter. ZA185/2164576-1 3 STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER 2:13-CV-01356-KJM-CKD 1 2 Dated: June 1, 2015 ROBINSON DI LANDO 3 By: 4 5 6 7 Dated: June 1, 2015 /S/ _______________________________ Michael Robinson George K. Rosenstock Attorneys for Plaintiff, VALLEY FINE FOODS COMPANY, INC. ARCHER NORRIS 8 /S/ 9 By: 10 11 _______________________________ Todd A. Jones Attorneys for Defendant BUONA VITA, INC. 12 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 5, 2015 15 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ZA185/2164576-1 4 STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER 2:13-CV-01356-KJM-CKD

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?