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)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Robert A. Weikert (SBN 121146) Aldo E. Ibarra (SBN 268585) NIXON PEABODY LLP One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: 415-984-8200 Fax: 415-984-8300 Gina M. McCreadie, PHV Nixon Peabody, LLP 100 Summer Street Boston, MA 02110 617-345-6189 Fax: 866-812-3848 Email: 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

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?