Kessler v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation
Filing
10
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 10/14/2015 ORDERING 9 Initial Expert Witnesses Disclosure due by 1/25/2016; Rebuttal Expert Witness Disclosure by 3/22/2016; and Discovery due by 4/22/2016. All other dates will remain the same as provided for in the 7/14/2015 scheduling order. (Reader, L)
(SPACE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY)
1
2
3
4
5
6
STEPHANIE L. QUINN (SBN 216655)
RAYMOND TUASON (SBN 279346)
MURPHY, CAMPBELL, ALLISTON & QUINN
8801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 230
Sacramento, CA 95826
Telephone: (916) 400-2300
Fax: (916) 400-2311
Attorneys for Defendant
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION, dba AMTRAK
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SACRAMENTO
9
10
LINDA KESSLER,
MURPHY, CAMPBELL, ALLISTON & QUINN
11
12
13
14
15
Case No. 2:15-CV-00728-GEB-AC
Plaintiff,
v.
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION, doing business as AMTRAK,
and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES TO
MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER
AND EXTEND DISCOVERY
DEADLINES;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Defendants.
16
17
18
STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND
19
EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
20
Pursuant to Rules 16(b)(4) and 29 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant
21
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION dba AMTRAK (“Defendant” or
22
“AMTRAK”) and Plaintiff LINDA KESSLER (“Plaintiff” or “KESSLER”), by and through their
23
attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to modify the scheduling order filed July 14, 2015, to
24
extend the time for discovery deadlines previously set in this matter.
25
26
27
28
The initial expert witness disclosure deadline is currently scheduled for November 24,
2015. The parties request a two month extension of this deadline to January 25, 2016.
The rebuttal expert witness disclosure deadline is currently scheduled for January 22,
2016. The parties request a two month extension of this deadline to March 22, 2016.
29
-130
31
STIPULATION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Discovery is currently scheduled to be completed by March 22, 2016. The parties
1
2
request a one month extension of this deadline to April 22, 2016.
All other dates will remain the same as provided for in the July 14, 2015 scheduling
3
4
order.
GOOD
5
6
CAUSE
EXISTS
FOR
THE
REQUESTED
MODIFICATIONS
AND
EXTENSIONS
7
Defendant’s lead trial counsel, Stephanie Quinn, is currently on unexpected leave
8
due to the very recent adoption of an infant. As such, Ms. Quinn will be unable to take
9
Plaintiff’s deposition previously scheduled to take place on October 20, 2015.
Moreover, despite the parties’ diligent efforts to schedule the depositions of Plaintiff’s
11
MURPHY, CAMPBELL, ALLISTON & QUINN
10
medical treaters prior to the expert witness disclosure deadline, the parties will be unable to
12
timely complete these depositions due to Ms. Quinn’s unexpected leave.
For these reasons, counsel for the parties have stipulated to modify the scheduling
13
14
order and extend discovery deadlines.
15
//
16
//
17
//
18
//
19
//
20
//
21
//
22
//
23
//
24
//
25
//
26
//
27
//
28
//
29
-230
31
STIPULATION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES; [PROPOSED] ORDER
All other dates will remain the same as provided for in the July 14, 2015 scheduling
1
2
3
4
order.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED
DATED: October 14, 2015
MURPHY, CAMPBELL, ALLISTON & QUINN
5
By:
6
7
8
/s/ RAYMOND TUASON
STEPHANIE L. QUINN (SBN 216655)
RAYMOND TUASON (SBN 279346)
Attorneys for Defendant
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION, dba AMTRAK
9
10
DATED: October 14, 2015
GANONG LAW
MURPHY, CAMPBELL, ALLISTON & QUINN
11
12
By:
13
/s/ PHILIP W. GANONG
PHILIP W. GANONG (SBN 88414)
Attorneys for Plaintiff LINDA KESSLER
14
15
IT IS SO ORDERED:
16
Dated: October 14, 2015
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
-330
31
STIPULATION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER AND EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?