Forrest v. Vic Firth Company

Filing 19

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/30/17: REQUEST for an extension of time re discovery is granted. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Robert A. Weikert (SBN 121146)
[e-mail]
Aldo E. Ibarra (SBN 268585)
[e-mail]
NIXON PEABODY LLP
One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Gina M. McCreadie, PHV
Nixon Peabody, LLP
100 Summer Street
Boston, MA 02110
617-345-6189
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

10
11

Attorneys for Defendant
VIC FIRTH COMPANY

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15

GERALD A. FORREST, an individual doing
business as GOSPELCHOPS,

Case No. 2:16-cv-02981-KJM-EFB
Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller

16
Plaintiffs,

STIPULATION AND [ORDER FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR
DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF
WRITTEN DISCOVERY
REQUESTS

17
v.
18
19
20

VIC FIRTH COMPANY, a Massachusetts
corporation,
Defendant.

Local Rule 144(a)
21
22

Plaintiff GERALD A. FORREST, an individual doing business as GOSPELCHOPS

23

(“Plaintiff”), and Defendant VIC FIRTH COMPANY (“Defendant”), collectively referred to as

24

the “Parties,” through their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate to an extension of time for

25

Defendant to serve its responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories; First Set of Requests for

26

Production of Documents; and First Set of Requests for Admissions to Defendant (together, the

27
28

-1STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S WRITTEN
DISCOVERY; Case No. 2:16-cv-02981

1

“Written Discovery”), as set forth in detail below.

2

On May 16, 2017, Plaintiff served Defendant with the Written Discovery. The Parties

3

have arranged for a mediation to take place on July 28, 2017 before Glenn Peterson through the

4

Court’s VDRP program. After a meet and confer, the Parties identified and, in some cases,

5

narrowed the discovery requests most important for Plaintiff to obtain prior to mediation and

6

agreed, in order to allow for sufficient time to focus on and engage in a meaningful mediation, to

7

extend Defendant’s deadline for responding to the remaining Written Discovery by 60 days, until

8

August 14, 2017.

9

Specifically, Defendant agrees to provide, via electronic service, to the maximum extent

10

practicable, meaningful answers (i.e., substantive responses rather than responses consisting only

11

of objections and a refusal to answer) to the following discovery requests on or before July 12,

12

2017:

13
14

1. Request for Production No. 2 (excluding any documents, such as invoices or purchase
orders, reflecting only Plaintiff’s purchase(s) of drumsticks from Defendant);

15

2. Request for Production Nos. 3-5, 8-12, and 14-16;

16

3. Request for Production No. 17 (limited to address only those of Defendant’s products

17

identified by Plaintiff’s counsel via email to Defendant’s counsel on June 22, 2017);

18

4. Interrogatories 7, 9, and 10.

19

By narrowing certain requests for purposes of pre-mediation discovery, Plaintiff does not

20

waive any right to obtain responses to the requests as originally drafted on August 14, 2017 or

21

such other post-mediation date as may be acceptable to Plaintiff.

22

As stated above, the Parties agree to extend the deadline for Defendant to respond to all

23

other currently outstanding Written Discovery to August 14, 2017. Specifically, the extension to

24

August 14, 2017 shall apply to:

25

1. Each and every Request in Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Admission;

26

2. Request for Production Nos. 1, 6, 7, 13, and 18-27; and

27
28

-2STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S WRITTEN
DISCOVERY; Case No. 2:16-cv-02981

1

3. Interrogatories 1-6, 8, and 11.

2

An extension to August 14, 2017, however, would exceed twenty-eight days and require

3

Court approval as provided by Local Rule 144(a). Based upon the foregoing, the Parties

4

respectfully request that the Court enter an order expanding the time for Defendant to serve its

5

responses to the Written Discovery as set forth above.

6

Good cause exists for this extension as the Parties are engaging in meaningful settlement

7

negotiations and will attend and participate in good faith in the mediation on July 28, 2017. This

8

is the Parties’ first request for an extension in connection with the Written Discovery.

9

This document is being electronically filed through the Court’s ECF System. In this

10

regard, counsel for Defendant hereby attests that (1) the content of this document is acceptable to

11

all persons required to sign the document; (2) Plaintiff’s counsel has concurred with the filing of

12

this document; and (3) a record supporting this concurrence is available for inspection or

13

production if so ordered.

14

Respectfully submitted,

15

Nixon Peabody LLP

16

DATED: June 26, 2017

19

By: /s/ Aldo E. Ibarra
Robert A. Weikert
Gina McCreadie
Aldo E. Ibarra
Attorneys for Defendant
VIC FIRTH COMPANY

20

Cohorn Law

17
18

21

DATED: June 26, 2017

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

By: /s/ Cari A. Cohorn
Cari A. Cohorn
Attorney for Plaintiff
GERALD A. FORREST dba GOSPELCHOPS

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 30, 2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-3STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S WRITTEN
DISCOVERY; Case No. 2:16-cv-02981