Murphy v. United States Forest Service, et al.

Filing 25

STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 4/25/2014 GRANTING the defendants a 17-Day Extension of Time to respond to the 15 First Amended Complaint; ORDERING the defendants to file their response by 5/12/2014. (Michel, G)

1
2
3
4

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
GREGORY T. BRODERICK
Assistant United States Attorney
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

5
Attorneys for Defendants
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11
12
13
14

DENNIS D. MURPHY
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE;
TOM TIDWELL, in his official capacity as
Chief of the United States Forest Service;
and NANCY J. GIBSON, in her official
capacity as Forest Supervisor of the United
States Forest Service,
Defendants

CASE NO. 13-cv-02315-GEB-AC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO
RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

15
16

The parties seek an order from this Court extending the time for the United States to respond to

17

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint so that the parties may continue to negotiate and prepare the terms

18

of a draft settlement agreement fully resolving the case.

19

Plaintiff served its Complaint in this matter on November 13, 2013. Pursuant to Federal Rule of

20

Civil Procedure 4(i), Defendants’ responsive pleading was due on January 13, 2014. The parties

21

stipulated to an extension of 15 days, up to and including January 28, 2014, for Defendants to respond.

22

In submitting the Joint Status Report, Plaintiff indicated that he would amend their Complaint to add

23

claims, and filed a First Amended Complaint on February 6, 2014. (Dkt. No. 13) Defendants’ response

24

is presently due on or about February 20, 2014. The Court entered a Scheduling Order in this matter

25

requiring Plaintiff to file a motion for summary judgment on or before September 22, 2014, and

26

Defendants’ to file any cross-motion by October 20, 2014. (Dkt. No. 14).

27
28
29
30

After filing of the Joint Status Report, the parties engaged in settlement talks and exchanged
drafts of a written term sheet. This Court then granted a further extension up to and including April 8,
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

1

1

2014. (See Dkt. No. 21.) On that date, the parties sought, and the Court later approved, a further

2

extension to April 25, 2014. (See Dkt. Nos. 22-23.) Although there are still areas where precise

3

language must be agreed-upon, the parties have exchanged “red-line” settlement drafts and are

4

negotiating language on agreed-upon concepts; thus, they continue to anticipate that resolution is

5

probable without further litigation. Resolution without further use of the Court’s resources would

6

appear to be good cause to further extend the time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff’s First

7

Amended Complaint.

8

Wherefore, pursuant to Local Rule 144, the parties hereby stipulate, through undersigned counsel

9

of record, to an extension of seventeen (17) days for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff’s First Amended

10

Complaint up to and including May 12, 2014. This should permit the parties sufficient time to finalize a

11

written agreement or to determine that resolution is impractical at this time, and to move forward with

12

litigation. No other dates in the Scheduling Order need be extended or modified to accommodate this

13

extension.

14

Respectfully submitted,

15

DATED: April 25, 2014

16

By

17
18

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney

19
20
21

/s/ Paul S. Weiland
Attorney for Plaintiff

By:

/s/ Gregory T. Broderick
GREGORY T. BRODERICK
Assistant United States Attorney

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

2

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2
3

Dated: April 25, 2014

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

3