V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Limited v. Meenakshi Overseas LLC

Filing 79

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/23/2020 GRANTING 78 Stipulation and Proposed Order, VACATING the 70 Pretrial Scheduling Order. (Coll, A)

1
2
3
4

Jack Rannells, Esq., Pro Hac Vice
Baker and Rannells, P.A.
92 East Main St, Ste 302
Somerville, NJ 08876
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Kenneth C Brooks (SBN 167,792)
Law Offices of Kenneth Brooks
16 Corning Avenue 136
Milpitas, CA 95035
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorney for Defendant,
MEENAKSHI OVERSEAS, LLC.

Attorney for Plaintiff,
V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS, LTD.

5
6
7
8
9
10

Robert M. Wilson, (State Bar No. 122731)
Law Office of Robert M. Wilson
770 L Street, Suite 950
Sacramento, CA 95814
Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

11
12

Attorney for Defendant,
MEENAKSHI OVERSEAS, LLC.

13
14
15
16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SACRAMENTO)
V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS, LTD.,

17

Plaintiff,

18

vs.
19
20
21

MEENAKSHI OVERSEAS, LLC.,
Defendant.

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

CASE 2:14-CV-02961-TLN-CKD
[Magistrate Judge: Carolyn K. Delaney]
[District Judge: Troy L. Nunley]
JOINT STIPULATION TO VACATE
PRETRIAL SCHEDULE ORDER
PENDING OUTCOME OF
DISPOSITIVE MOTION AND
ORDER

22
23

After entry of the Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Oder of July 7, 2020 (ECF 70), Plaintiff

24

filed an Amended Complaint (ECF 71). Defendant has filed a dispositive motion seeking, inter
25
26
27

alia, dismissal of the Amended Complaint (ECF 73). Plaintiff filed a timely opposition (ECF
75), and the motion is now fully briefed. See Reply (ECF 76). The court took that matter under

28

1
JOINT STIPULATION TO VACATE PRETRIAL SCHEDULE ORDER PENDING OUTCOME OF DISPOSITIVE
MOTION AND ORDER

1

submission without further briefing. See Minute Order (ECF 77). As a result, Counsel for the

2

parties have jointly agreed to stipulate to vacating the Courts Pretrial Scheduling Order for good

3

cause to afford the Court time to decide the motion without the parties incurring potentially

4

unnecessary costs, should the Court grant the motion, while ensuring that Plaintiff is not unduly
5
6
7

prejudiced by having a shortened period within which to complete discovery. It is requested that
this Court order another Pretrial Schedule should Defendant's motion not be granted.

8
9

Upon e-filing the joint request and proposed order, the proposed order has been emailed
in accordance with Local Rule 137(b), for review and approval to [e-mail].

10
11

Respectfully requested by the undersigned, on
behalf of the parties jointly,

12
13

DATED: October 23, 2020
14

By:

/s/ Kenneth C. Brooks
Kenneth C. Brooks, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff

By:

/s/ Robert M. Wilson
Robert M. Wilson, Esq.
Attorney for Defendant

15
16

DATED: October 23, 2020
17
18
19
20

////

21

////

22

////
23
24

////

25

////

26

////

27
28

2
JOINT STIPULATION TO VACATE PRETRIAL SCHEDULE ORDER PENDING OUTCOME OF DISPOSITIVE
MOTION AND ORDER

1

ORDER

2

Good cause for vacating the pretrial order exists due to the dispositive nature of the

3

motion, pending a ruling on the motion, the need for the parties to avoid unnecessary cost of

4

litigation without knowing the scope and nature of the issues, if any, subject to litigation, the
5
6

joint request by the parties and stipulation thereto to vacate the Pretrial Scheduling Order of July

7

7, 2020 (ECF 70) is hereby GRANTED.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated: October 23, 2020

10
11

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

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

3
JOINT STIPULATION TO VACATE PRETRIAL SCHEDULE ORDER PENDING OUTCOME OF DISPOSITIVE
MOTION AND ORDER