Global Comminity Monitor, et al v. Mammoth Pacific, LP et al

Filing 52

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/9/16 ORDERING the court APPROVES the parties' stipulation regarding the discovery of financial information from defendants, as outlined above. However, the parties are a dvised that, to the extent that the parties agreed to produce documents or conduct other discovery beyond the deadlines outlined in the operative pretrial scheduling order, such an agreement will not be enforced by the court through formal motion practice after the applicable discovery deadline(s) have passed. As such, the parties are strongly encouraged to seek modification of the deadlines in the pretrial scheduling order from Judge England to formally facilitate such discovery efforts. Such modification may be sought by virtue of an appropriate stipulation and proposed order, setting forth good cause for modification of the scheduling order. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4

MATTHEW B. HIPPLER (Cal. Bar No. 212036)
HOLLAND & HART LLP
5441 Kietzke Lane, Second Floor
Reno, NV 89511
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9
10

HOLLAND & HART LLP

222 SO. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2200
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84101

11

STEVEN G. JONES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
EMILY C. SCHILLING (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
HOLLAND & HART LLP
222 So. Main Street, Suite 2200
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15
16
17
18

GLOBAL COMMUNITY MONITOR, a
California nonprofit corporation;
LABORERS’ INTERNATIONAL
UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL
UNION NO. 783, an organized labor
union; RANDAL SIPES, JR., an
individual; RUSSEL COVINGTON, an
individual;

Case No. 2:14-cv-01612-MCE-KJN
STIPULATION AND ORDER
REGARDING DISCOVERY OF
FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM
DEFENDANTS

19
Plaintiffs,
20
v.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

MAMMOTH PACIFIC, L.P., a California
Limited Partnership; ORMAT NEVADA,
INC., a Delaware Corporation; ORMAT
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. a Delaware
Corporation; and DOES I-X, inclusive,
Defendants.

Honorable Kendall J. Newman

RECITALS

1
1.

2

On May 22, 2015, Plaintiffs propounded their First Set of Requests for Production of

3

Documents on Defendants (“Plaintiffs’ First RFPs”). Plaintiffs’ RFP Nos. 37-60 sought financial

4

information from each of the Defendants, including cash flow statements, income statements and

5

balance sheets, audited and unaudited financial statements, loan applications, prospectuses, capital

6

budgets and tax returns.
2.

7

On June 24, 2015, Defendants served their Objections and Responses to Plaintiffs’ First

8

RFPs. Defendants objected to each request seeking financial information on the grounds that those

9

requests were not reasonably calculated to the discovery of admissible evidence and unduly

HOLLAND & HART LLP

burdensome and that they sought documents that were not relevant to the claims or defenses at issue in

11
222 SO. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2200
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84101

10

this action.
3.

12
13

After negotiation, the parties reached a compromise regarding the discovery of

Defendants’ financial information which is reflected in the Stipulation below:
STIPULATION

14

The Parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate as follows:

15

1.

16

Defendants agreed to assemble, Bates-number and produce all publicly-available

17

financial information reflected in 10-Qs and 10-Ks submitted by Defendants to the United States

18

Securities and Exchange Commission, and to do so on or before March 18, 2016;
2.

19

In the event the Court grants a dispositive motion brought by Plaintiffs and enters a

20

finding of liability against any or all Defendants under either the federal Clean Air Act or Great Basin

21

Unified Air Pollution Control District Rule 209 (“Rule 209”), Defendants agree to disclose the

22

information sought under Plaintiffs’ RFP Nos. 37-60 within thirty (30) days from the date of the

23

Court’s Order;
3.

24

In order to prevent a delay in the Court’s ruling on Plaintiffs’ dispositive motion

25

regarding Defendants’ liability under either the federal Clean Air Act or Rule 209 from prejudicing

26

Plaintiffs, if the Court has not entered an order on Plaintiffs’ dispositive motion by November

27

30, 2016, Defendants agree to produce documents responsive to Plaintiffs’ RFP Nos. 37-60 by that
date.
STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY
OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS - 2

1

4.

In the event the Court enters a finding of liability against any or all Defendants under

2

either the federal Clean Air Act or Rule 209, the parties stipulate that, notwithstanding any deadlines

3

for the completion of expert discovery agreed to between the parties or established in the Case

4

Schedule, Plaintiffs will have a period of thirty (30) days from the date of Defendants’ production of

5

any information in response to Plaintiffs’ RFP Nos. 37-60 to designate an expert and produce an

6

expert report with respect to that information and any penalties that may be imposed based on the

7

Court’s finding of liability. The parties also stipulate that Defendants may take the deposition of

8

Plaintiffs’ financial expert within fourteen (14) days from the date of the production of that expert’s

9

report.

10

HOLLAND & HART LLP

222 SO. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2200
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84101

11

So Stipulated this 3rd day of May, 2016:

12

HOLLAND & HART LLP

13

15

s/ Steven G. Jones
MATTHEW HIPPLER
STEVEN G. JONES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
EMILY C. SCHILLING (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

16

Attorneys for Defendants

14

17
18

LOZEAU | DRURY

19

s/ Douglas Chermak
RICHARD DRURY
DOUGLAS CHERMAK

20
21

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
22
23
24
25
26
27

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY
OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS - 3

ORDER

1
2

The court APPROVES the parties’ stipulation regarding the discovery of financial information

3

from defendants, as outlined above. However, the parties are advised that, to the extent that the parties

4

agreed to produce documents or conduct other discovery beyond the deadlines outlined in the

5

operative pretrial scheduling order, such an agreement will not be enforced by the court through

6

formal motion practice after the applicable discovery deadline(s) have passed. As such, the parties are

7

strongly encouraged to seek modification of the deadlines in the pretrial scheduling order from Judge

8

England to formally facilitate such discovery efforts. Such modification may be sought by virtue of an

9

appropriate stipulation and proposed order, setting forth good cause for modification of the scheduling

HOLLAND & HART LLP

order.

11
222 SO. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2200
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84101

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12

Dated: May 9, 2016

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY
OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS - 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

1
2

I hereby certify that on May 3, 2016, I electronically filed the foregoing Stipulation and

3

Order on Regarding Discovery of Financial Information from Defendants via CM/ECF, in compliance

4

with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and LR-133(a). Service on all registered participants will be

5

accomplished by CM/ECF on the following:

6
7
8
9
10

Richard T. Drury
Douglas Chermak
Lozeau Drury LLP
410 12th Street, Suite 250
Oakland, CA 94607
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

HOLLAND & HART LLP

222 SO. MAIN STREET, SUITE 2200
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84101

11
12
13

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct.

14
15

/s/ Barbara Thurgood

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

8748028_1.docx

24
25
26
27

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY
OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS - 5