Phoenix Solutions Inc v. Wells Fargo & Company

Filing 64

*** FILED IN ERROR - SEE 67 *** STIPULATION AND ORDER granting request to file 61 2nd Amended Complaint; Signed by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel on 9/18/2008. (awb, COURT-STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2008) Modified on 9/24/2008 (awb, COURT-STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973) Acting United States Attorney IOANA PETROU (CABN 170834) JONATHAN D. SCHMIDT (CABN 230646) Assistant United States Attorneys 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] SONDRA L. MILLS (DCBN 367463) ALLAN GORDUS (MOBN 48210) Trial Attorneys DOJ Office of Consumer Litigation Liberty Square Building 450 5th Street, NW, Sixth Floor South Telephone: [phone] FAX: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CR No. 08-0164 MHP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME

19 Plaintiff, 20 v. 21 W. SCOTT HARKONEN, 22 Defendant. 23 24

On September 15, 2008, the parties in this case appeared before the Honorable District 25 Court Judge Marilyn H. Patel for further status conference. The parties stipulated that time 26 should be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act calculations from September 15, 2008 to March 5, 27 2009, at which time the parties are scheduled to appear for a hearing on first round pretrial 28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME - CR 08-0164 MHP

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

motions. The parties represented that granting the continuance was necessary for effective preparation of counsel given the complexity of the case, nature of the prosecution, and voluminous discovery, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A)) and (B)(ii). SO STIPULATED: BRIAN J. STRETCH Acting United States Attorney

DATED: September 15, 2008 10 11 12 DATED: September 15, 2008 13 14 15

________/s/_______________________ IOANA PETROU Assistant United States Attorney

_________/s/______________________ WILLIAM M. GOODMAN Attorney for W. Scott Harkonen

As the Court found on September 15, 2008, and for the reasons stated above, the Court 16 finds that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public 17 and the defendant in a speedy trial and that time should be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act 18 calculations from September 15, 2008 to March 5, 2009 for effective preparation of counsel. 19 See 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A). The failure to grant the requested continuance would deny 20 counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the complexity 21 of the case and nature of the prosecution, and would result in a miscarriage of justice. See 18 22 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(ii). 23 SO ORDERED. 25 26 9/18/2008 DATED:______________ 27 28 24

UNIT ED

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

ER STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME - CR 08-0164 MHP

2

N

F D IS T IC T O R

A

C

LI

FO

_____________________________________ Honorable Marilyn H. Patel atel District Court Judgearilyn H. P Judge M

R NIA

O OR IT IS S

DERED

RT U O

NO

RT

H