Smith v. City of Stockton et al

Filing 70

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/16/2017 ORDERING that the scheduling order is modified as follows: Expert Discovery cutoff is CONTINUED to 7/28/2017 and the last day to hear Dispositive Motions is CONTINUED to 9/22/2017. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Lori Rifkin, Esq. [S.B. #244081]
HADSELL STORMER & RENICK LLP
4300 Horton Street, #15
Emeryville, CA 94608
Telephone: [phone]/Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Dan Stormer, Esq. [S.B. #101967]
Brian Olney, Esq. [S.B. #298089]
HADSELL STORMER & RENICK LLP
128 N. Fair Oaks Ave.
Pasadena, CA 91103
Telephone: [phone]/Facsimile: [phone]
Emails: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

10

Attorneys for Plaintiff

11

16

DANA A. SUNTAG, State Bar Number: 125127
JOSHUA J. STEVENS, State Bar Number: 238105
HERUM\CRABTREE\SUNTAG
A California Professional Corporation
3757 Pacific Avenue, Suite 222
Stockton, California 95207
Telephone: [phone]/Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

17

Attorneys for All Defendants

12
13
14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO DIVISION

18
19

Nathaniel Smith,

20
21
22
23
24
25

Case No.: 2:15-cv-00363-KJM-AC
Plaintiff,

v.
City of Stockton; Officer Patrick Mayer, Officer
Robin Harrison, and Officer Michael Perez, in
their individual capacities; and Chief of Police
Eric Jones, in his official and individual
capacities,
Defendants.

26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST TO MODIFY
SCHEDULING ORDER; [PROP] ORDER

[Assigned to the Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller
– Courtroom 3]
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST &
ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING
ORDER
Complaint filed:
Discovery Cut-Off:
Motion Cut-Off:
Trial Date:

February 12, 2015
May 26, 2017
July 14, 2017
TBD

1

Plaintiff NATHANIEL SMITH and Defendants CITY OF STOCKTON,

2

OFFICER ROBIN HARRISON, OFFICER PATRICK MAYER, OFFICER MICHAEL

3

PEREZ, and CHIEF OF POLICE ERIC JONES (hereinafter collectively referred to as

4

“Defendants”), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, and subject to the

5

approval of the court, hereby stipulate as follows:

6
7

Whereas, the discovery cut-off to complete expert discovery is May 26, 2017,
and the last date by which dispositive motions must be heard is July 14, 2017; and

8

Whereas the parties had all expert depositions scheduled to be completed by the

9

end of May. Plaintiff’s only expert, Scott DeFoe, was scheduled to be deposed on

10

May 12, 2017, but this deposition had to be cancelled at the last minute due to the

11

sudden passing of Mr. DeFoe’s mother on the evening of May 11, 2017; and

12

Defendants’ two experts were scheduled to be deposed after Mr. DeFoe; and

13

The parties wish to maintain the status quo in terms of the scheduling of expert

14

depositions with regards to Plaintiff’s expert being deposed first, followed by

15

Defendant’ two experts; and

16

Whereas, the parties jointly request that the expert discovery cut-off date be

17

modified to enable the parties time to complete expert discovery in the manner

18

described above in order to accommodate Mr. DeFoe’s period of bereavement; and

19

Whereas, expert testimony may provide crucial support for a dispositive motion

20

such that the parties request the last day to hear dispositive motions be extended

21

accordingly; and

22

Whereas, Plaintiff is incarcerated, and requests 3 weeks instead of the standard 2

23

weeks to file opposition to Defendants’ anticipated dispositive motion, and Defendants

24

are agreeable with that request in conjunction with the other modifications this

25

stipulation seeks and conditional on the Court granting those modifications; and

26

Whereas, when an act must be done within a specified time, the court may, for

27

good cause, extend the time with or without motion or notice of the court acts, or if a

28

request is made, before the original time expires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A); see also
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST TO
MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER ;
[PROP] ORDER

-1-

1

Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc. 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (“The district

2

court may modify the pretrial schedule ‘if it cannot be reasonably met despite the

3

diligence of the party seeking the amendment.’”);

4
5

The parties request that the Court modify the operative scheduling order in this
case as follows:

6
7
8
9
10

Expert Discovery Cut-Off
Last Day to Hear Dispositive Motions
File Joint Pretrial Conference Statement
Final Pretrial Conference

Proposed
7/28/17
9/15/171
Unchanged
Unchanged

Based on the foregoing, the parties respectfully request that the Court approve

11
12

Current
5/26/17
7/14/17
11/10/17
12/8/17

this stipulated modification of the scheduling order.

13
Respectfully Submitted,

14
15

Dated: May 17, 2017

16

HADSELL STORMER & RENICK LLP
By:

17
18
19

Dated: May 17, 2017

20

HERUM\CRABTREE\SUNTAG
By:

21
22

/s/ - Lori Rifkin
Lori Rifkin
Attorney for Plaintiff

/s/ - Joshua J. Stevens
Joshua J. Stevens
Attorney for All Defendants

23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Defendants anticipate filing their motion(s) 35 days before the hearing instead of 28 days
before the hearing to give Plaintiff an additional seven days to prepare and file opposition.
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST TO
MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER ;
-2[PROP] ORDER

1

ORDER

2

The Court, having considered the parties’ stipulation, and good cause appearing,

3

the Joint Stipulated Request to Modify the Scheduling is GRANTED and all parties

4

shall comply with its provisions.

5

The Court modifies the operative scheduling order in this case as follows:

6
Current
5/26/17
7/14/17
11/10/17
12/8/17

7
8
9
10
11

Expert Discovery Cut-Off
Last Day to Hear Dispositive Motions
File Joint Pretrial Conference Statement
Final Pretrial Conference

Proposed
7/28/17
9/22/17
Unchanged
Unchanged

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

DATED: June 16, 2017

14
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST TO
MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER ;
[PROP] ORDER

-1-