United States of America v. LaPant et al
Filing
140
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 4/10/2020 AMENDING the schedule as follows: Reply briefs to 113 and 121 Motions for Summary Judgment due by 6/12/2020, 113 and 121 Motion Hearings are set for 6/26/2020 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller, and the Joint Pretrial Statement is due 8/7/2020. (Huang, H)
1
5
ANDREW J. DOYLE
JOHN THOMAS H. DO
ANDREW S. COGHLAN
United States Department of Justice
Environmental and Natural Resources Division
Environmental Defense Section
P.O. Box 7611
Washington, DC 20044
Tel: (202) 514-4427 / Fax: (202) 514-8865
6
Attorneys for the United States
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
CANNATA, O’TOOLE, FICKES & OLSON
THERESE Y. CANNATA
MARK P. FICKES
100 Pine Street, Suite 350
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: 415.409.8900 / Facsimile: 415.409.8904
Attorneys for Defendant Roger J. LaPant, Jr.
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
2:16-cv-001498-KJM-DB
15
16
17
18
19
20
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
ROGER J. LAPANT, JR.,
SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER
FOR EXTENSION OF DEADLINES AND
S.J. HEARING
Defendant.
21
22
23
Plaintiff United States of America and Defendant Roger J. LaPant, Jr. have met and
24
conferred and hereby stipulate and propose for the Court’s approval a further extension of
25
deadlines and the summary judgment hearing date. Specifically:
26
27
28
1.
On February 12, 2020, the parties appeared before The Honorable Kendall J.
Newman, United States Magistrate Judge, for a settlement conference.
2.
As noted in the minutes from the settlement conference (ECF No. 134), progress
Stipulation/Order for Extension of Deadlines/S.J. Hearing
1
2
3
4
was made, and a further settlement conference occurred via teleconference on March 9, 2020.
3.
Since March 9, 2020, Judge Newman has regularly spoken with the parties, and,
through him, the parties have exchanged settlement-related information and communications.
4.
Currently, as set forth in the Stipulation and Order dated February 21, 2020 (ECF
5
No. 136), reply briefs associated with cross motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 113 & 121)
6
are due April 10, 2020, and a hearing is scheduled for April 24, 2020.
7
5.
To allow the parties to focus their attention and resources toward settlement
8
efforts, the parties stipulate and propose for the Court’s approval a further extension of the
9
deadline for reply briefs from April 10 to June 12, 2020.
10
11
12
13
14
15
5.
Likewise, the parties stipulate and propose for the Court’s approval a further
extension of the summary judgment hearing date from April 24 to June 26, 2020.
6.
And the parties stipulate and propose for the Court’s approval a parallel extension
of the deadline for the Joint Pretrial Statement from June 5 to August 7, 2020.
Dated: April 6, 2020
Respectfully submitted,
18
/s/ Andrew J. Doyle
United States Department of Justice
Environmental and Natural Resources Division
Environmental Defense Section
P.O. Box 7611
Washington, DC 20044
Tel: (202) 514-4427
19
Attorney for the United States
16
17
20
21
22
CANNATA, O’TOOLE, FICKES & OLSON LLP
/s/ Therese Y. Cannata
THERESE Y. CANNATA
Attorneys for Defendant ROGER J. LAPANT, Jr.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Stipulation/Order for Extension of Deadlines/S.J. Hearing
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ORDER
Upon due consideration, the Court approves the foregoing stipulation and amends the
schedule as follows:
(1) Reply briefs associated with cross motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 113 &
121) are now due June 12, 2020.
(2) The hearing date for the cross motions for summary judgment is now June 26, 2020,
at 10:00 a.m.
(3) The Joint Pretrial Statement is now due August 7, 2020.
9
10
DATED: April 10, 2020.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Stipulation/Order for Extension of Deadlines/S.J. Hearing
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?