California River Watch v. City of Vacaville

Filing 10

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/6/17 ORDERING that the last date for the Parties to submit Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(a)(1) is CONTINUED until 45 days after service of notice of the Court's ruling on the City's Motion to Dismiss. (Kastilahn, A)

1 Gregory J. Newmark (SBN: 190488)
[e-mail]
2 Shiraz D. Tangri (SBN: 203037)
[e-mail]
3 Adam J. Regele (SBN: 295235)
[e-mail]
4 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON
707 Wilshire Blvd., 24th Floor
5 Los Angeles, California 90017
Telephone: [phone]
6 Facsimile:
[phone]
7 Attorneys for Defendant CITY OF VACAVILLE
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO DIVISION

10
11 CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH,

Case No. 2:17-cv-00524-KJM-KJN

12

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER
TO CONTINUE TIME FOR INITIAL
DISCLOSURES

13

Plaintiff,
v.

14 CITY OF VACAVILLE,
15

Defendant.

Judge: Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller
Magistrate Judge: Hon. Kendall J. Newman
[F.R.C.P. 26(a)(1)]

16

Status Conference Date:
Status Conference Time:
Courtroom:
Trial Date:

17
18

June 16, 2017
10:00 a.m
3
None Set

19
20

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN ALL PARTIES AS

21 FOLLOWS:
22

Plaintiff California River Watch (“Plaintiff”), and Defendant the City of Vacaville (the

23 “City”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby
24 respectfully apply to this Court for an Order continuing the date for the Parties to exchange Initial
25 Disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 26(a)(1) until 45 days after
26 service of notice of this Court’s ruling on the Motion to Dismiss.
27

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2017, the City filed a motion to dismiss all claims in this action

28 pursuant to FRCP Rule 12(b)(6) (“Motion to Dismiss”);
2:17-cv-00524-KJM-KJN
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME FOR INITIAL DISCLOSURES

1

WHEREAS, the Motion to Dismiss is scheduled for hearing on June 16, 2017;

2

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court’s Minute Order dated May 15, 2017, the initial pretrial

3 scheduling conference in this action was advanced to June 16, 2017;
4

WHEREAS, the Parties met and conferred pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(f) on May 25, 2017,

5 to consider the nature and basis of the claims and defenses, the possibilities for promptly settling
6 or resolving the case; making or arranging for the disclosures required by FRCP Rule 26(a)(1),
7 discussing any issues about preserving discoverable information, and developing a proposed
8 discovery plan;
9

WHEREAS, the Parties’ Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(a)(1) are currently

10 due on June 8, 2017;
11

WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed that postponing Initial Disclosures till a date after this

12 Court rules on the pending Motion to Dismiss would allow the Parties to avoid potentially
13 unnecessary litigation costs;
14

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, between the Parties, subject to this

15 Court’s approval, that: the last date for the Parties to serve Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP
16 Rule 26(a)(1), be continued until forty-five (45) days following service of notice of this Court’s
17 ruling on the Motion to Dismiss.
18 / / /
19 / / /
20 / / /
21 / / /
22 / / /
23 / / /
24 / / /
25 / / /
26 / / /
27 / / /
28 / / /
2:17-cv-00524-KJM-KJN
2
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME FOR INITIAL DISCLOSURES

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

LAW OFFICE OF DAVID J. WEINSOFF
LAW OFFICE OF JACK SILVER

2
3
4

DATED: May 31, 2017

By:

5
6

/s/ David J. Weinsoff
David J. Weinsoff
Jack Silver
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH

7
8
9 DATED: May 31, 2017

MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON
By:

10
11
12

/s/ Gregory J. Newmark
Gregory J. Newmark
Attorney for Defendant
CITY OF VACAVILLE

13
14
ORDER

15
16

For good cause shown, the above Stipulation is adopted as follows:

17

The last date for the Parties to submit Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP Rule 26(a)(1) is

18 hereby continued until forty-five (45) days after service of notice of the Court’s ruling on the
19 City’s Motion to Dismiss.
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21 DATED: June 6, 2017.
22
23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2:17-cv-00524-KJM-KJN
3
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TIME FOR INITIAL DISCLOSURES