Lennear, et al v. Diamond Pet Food Processors of California, LLC et al

Filing 20

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/30/2014 ORDERING the Discovery Deadline EXTENDED to 12/22/2014. (Donati, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

MCCORMACK AND ERLICH, LLP

150 POST STREET, SUITE 742, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108
TELEPHONE: [phone]

9
10
11
12
13

Bryan J. McCormack, Esq.
MCCORMACK AND ERLICH, LLP
150 Post Street, Suite 742
San Francisco, CA 94108
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Leland Lennear and Narvel Henry, Sr.

John P. Hasman, Esq.
ARMSTRONG TEASDALE, LLP
50 West Liberty Street, Suite 950
Reno, Nevada 89501
Telephone No.: [phone]
Facsimile No. : [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
Diamond Pet Food Processors of California, LLC, and
Diamond Pet Food Processors of Ripon, LLC

14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18
19

LELAND LENNEAR AND NARVELL
HENRY, SR.

Case No. 2:13-CV-01871-TLN-DAD
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
EXTEND DEADLINES IN SCHEDULING
ORDER

Plaintiffs,

20
21

vs.

22

DIAMOND PET FOOD PROCESSORS
OF CALIFORNIA, LLC; DIAMOND PET
FOOD PROCESSORS OF RIPON, LLC;
SCHELL & KAMPETER, INC. d/b/a
DIAMOND PET FOODS; and DOES 1 to
25,

23
24
25
26

Complaint Filed:
Trial Date:

September 9, 2013
August 17, 2015

Defendants.

27
28
-1STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINES IN SCHEDULING ORDER

1

Plaintiffs LELAND LENNAR and NARVELL HENRY (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants

2

DIAMOND PET FOOD PROCESSORS OF CALIFORNIA, LLC; DIAMOND PET FOOD

3

PROCESSORS OF RIPON, LLC, and SCHELL & KAMPETER, INC. (dba) DIAMAOND PET

4

FOODS (hereinafter, collectively referred to as “Defendants”) hereby jointly stipulate and seek leave

5

pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to extend the deadlines set forth in the

6

Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Scheduling Order (hereinafter the “Scheduling Order”) for good cause as

7

set forth herein.

MCCORMACK AND ERLICH, LLP

Plaintiffs’ lawsuit asserts claims against Defendants for race harassment, race discrimination,

9
150 POST STREET, SUITE 742, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108
TELEPHONE: [phone]

8

wrongful termination, and retaliation under state and federal law. Plaintiffs filed the initial Complaint

10

on September 9, 2013, and Defendants filed their Answer on October 10, 2013. Plaintiff seeks

11

special damages in the form of past and future earnings, employment benefits, loss of earning

12

capacity, general damages, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. Defendants deny liability.

13

On January 29, 2014, this Court issued a Pre-Trial Scheduling Order without hearing.

14

According to the Order, the deadline for non-expert discovery is September 19, 2014, the expert

15

disclosure deadline is November 20, 2014, the last date for dispositive motions is March 12, 2015,

16

and the jury trial is scheduled for August 17, 2015.

17

On July 8, 2014, this Court granted the parties’ Stipulation Extending Deadlines in the

18

Discovery Order and revised the deadline for non-expert discovery to November 20, 2014 and the

19

expert disclosure deadline to December 17, 2014. The other deadlines remained the same.

20

Most of the non-expert discovery will be completed in the next few weeks. However, the

21

parties are currently meeting and conferring on issues concerning written discovery responses, and

22

need additional time to complete this process. Currently, any motion to compel concerning deficient

23

discovery responses must be filed by October 30, 2014, in order to be heard by November 20, 2014,

24

assuming the Court has availability to hear a motion on that date.

25

Thus, the parties seek a brief extension of the deadline to complete non-expert discovery. The

26

parties seek to extend the deadline to complete non-expert discovery from November 20, 2014 to

27

December 22, 2014. The other deadlines shall remain the same.

28

In light of the foregoing, and for good cause shown, the parties respectfully request that the
-2STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINES IN SCHEDULING ORDER

1

Court modify the existing Scheduling Order as agreed by the parties and as set forth herein. This

2

extension does not affect the dates related to dispositive motions, the pretrial conference date, or the

3

trial date, although those dates are included below for sake of context.

4
5

Dated: October 21, 2014

Dated: October 21, 2014

/s/ Bryan J. McCormack
BRYAN J. McCORMACK
McCORMACK & ERLICH, LLP

/s/ John P. Hasman
JOHN P. HASMAN
ARMSTRONG TEASDALE, LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Attorneys for Defendants

6
7
8

MCCORMACK AND ERLICH, LLP

150 POST STREET, SUITE 742, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108
TELEPHONE: [phone]

9
10

ORDER

11
12
13
14

Pursuant to the joint stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, the deadline for
completion of discovery is hereby continued from November 20, 2014 to December 22, 2014. All
other dates remain the same.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

Dated: October 30, 2014

19
20
21
22

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
-3STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINES IN SCHEDULING ORDER