Danner v. County of San Joaquin et al

Filing 26

ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 5/16/2016 ORDERING all Discovery in this action, with exception of expert discovery, shall be completed no later than 12/21/2016. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

MAYALL HURLEY, P.C.
A Professional Corporation
2453 Grand Canal Boulevard, Second Floor
Stockton, California 95207-8253
Telephone [phone]
MARK E. BERRY, ESQ.
CA State Bar No. 155091
DERICK KONZ, ESQ
CA State Bar No. 286902
Attorneys for Defendants,
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN and
MANUEL ANDRADE
THE LAW OFFICE OF YOUSEF J. TOTAH
YOUSEF J. TOTAH, ESQ. (SBN: 296759)
951 Mariners Island Blvd., Suite 300
San Mateo, California 94404
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

12
13

Attorney for Plaintiff,
JONATHAN EARL DANNER

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17
18

JONATHAN EARL DANNER,
Plaintiff,

19
20
21

vs.
THE COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, and
MANUEL ANDRADE,

22

Defendants.

23
24
25
26

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

Case No.: 2:15-cv-00887-MCE-EFB
JOINT OBJECTION TO THE INITIAL
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER;
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
FOR MODIFICATION OF THE INITIAL
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER.

Pursuant to Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., rule 16(b)(4), by stipulation of all parties, and good
cause showing therefor, Defendants COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN and MANUEL ANDRADE

27
28
29
30

_____________________________________________
Joint Objection To The Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order; Stipulation And Proposed Order For Modification Of The
Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order.
Page 1

1

(collectively hereinafter “Defendants”) and Plaintiff JONATHAN DANNER hereby move this

2

Court to modify the Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 24.)
I.

3

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

4

On April 24, 2015, Plaintiff filed his original Complaint in this matter. (ECF No. 1.)

5

On August 18, 2015, Defendants COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN and MANUEL

6

ANDRADE filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., rule

7

12(b)(6). (ECF No. 13.)
On December 2, 2015, the court GRANTED in part and DENIED in part Defendants’

8
9

motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 18.)

10

On December 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 19.)

11

On January 11, 2016, Defendants filed Answers to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint.

12

(ECF Nos. 20, 21.)

13

On May 4, 2016, the Court issued a Pretrial Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 24.) The

14

Pretrial Scheduling Order required, “[a]ll discovery, with the exception of expert discovery,

15

shall be completed no later than three hundred sixty−five (365) days from the filing of the

16

original complaint in the action.” (ECF No. 24, 2:18-20.)
II.

17

STIPULATION AND STATEMENT OF GOOD CAUSE

18

Good cause exists to modify the Pretrial Scheduling Order.

19

As the scheduling order currently directs, discovery is to be completed by April 24, 2016

20

(“365 days from the filing of the original complaint”). This date has already passed and already

21

passed when the court issued the May 4, 2016 Pretrial Scheduling Order. Neither party has

22

conducted discovery yet.

23

The parties hereby stipulate and request that the Court modify the Pretrial Scheduling

24

Order such that the non-expert discovery cut-off date be set to three hundred sixty-five (365)

25

days from the December 21, 2015 filing of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. Accordingly,

26

the new proposed non-expert discovery cut-off date would be December 21, 2016. All other

27
28
29
30

_____________________________________________
Joint Objection To The Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order; Stipulation And Proposed Order For Modification Of The
Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order.
Page 2

1

timelines in the Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Order would remain the same, as they are

2

conditioned on occurring within a set number of days after the non-expert discovery cut-off date.
Defendants and Plaintiff, by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and

3
4

agree to the foregoing modification of the Scheduling Order.

5
6

DATED: May 13, 2016

/s/ Mark E. Berry
By____________________________________________
MARK E. BERRY, Esq.
Attorney for Defendants, COUNT OF SAN
JOAQUIN and MANUEL ANDRADE

7
8
9
10

MAYALL HURLEY, P.C.

DATED: May 13, 2016

11

THE LAW OFFICE OF YOUSEF J. TOTAH

/s/ Yousef J. Totah (as authorized on 5/13/16)
By________________________ __________________
YOUSEF J. TOTAH, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff, JONATHAN DANNER

12
13
14

ORDER

15

By stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefor, the Court hereby Orders

16
17

that the Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 24) is modified as follows:
All discovery in this action, with the exception of expert discovery, shall be

18
19
20

completed no later than December 21, 2016. The previous date of April 24, 2016 is hereby
vacated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22

Dated: May 16, 2016

23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

_____________________________________________
Joint Objection To The Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order; Stipulation And Proposed Order For Modification Of The
Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order.
Page 3