State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Metropolitan West Securities LLC et al
Filing
159
ORDER GRANTING 157 Stipulation Continuing Certain Case Deadlines. Dispositive Motion Hearing set for 3/30/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Jeffrey S. White.. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 12/9/11. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/9/2011)
Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document157
1
2
3
4
5
Filed12/08/11 Page1 of 4
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
Marc T.G. Dworsky (SB# 157413)
James C. Rutten (SB# 201791)
Karen J. Ephraim (SB# 233824)
Eric P. Tuttle (SB# 248440)
355 South Grand Avenue, 35th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071-1560
(213) 683-9100; (213) 687-3702 (fax)
marc.dworsky@mto.com, james.rutten@mto.com,
karen.ephraim@mto.com, eric.tuttle@mto.com
6
7
8
Attorneys for WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
(successor by merger to Defendant WACHOVIA
BANK, N.A.) and Defendant METROPOLITAN
WEST SECURITIES LLC
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
12
13
14
STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE
FUND,
15
16
17
18
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. CV 09-02959 JSW (EDL)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CONTINUING CERTAIN CASE
DEADLINES
vs.
METROPOLITAN WEST SECURITIES
LLC; WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.; DOES
1 through 10, inclusive; and DOES 11
through 20, inclusive,
[Declaration of Karen J. Ephraim filed
concurrently herewith]
19
Defendants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CERTAIN CASE DEADLINES
Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document157
1
Filed12/08/11 Page2 of 4
Plaintiff State Compensation Insurance Fund (“State Fund”) and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
2
(successor by merger to Defendant Wachovia Bank, N.A.) and Defendant Metropolitan West
3
Securities LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) stipulate as follows:
4
5
WHEREAS the Court entered an order on August 22, 2011 (Dkt. No. 106) granting the
parties’ stipulation to continue case deadlines to the following dates:
6
Fact discovery cutoff:
7
Disclosure of experts and reports:
8
Disclosure of rebuttal experts and reports:
January 13, 2012
9
Expert discovery cutoff:
February 3, 2012
10
Completion of mediation:
February 28, 2012
11
Dispositive motion hearing date:
12
Final pretrial conference:
May 21, 2012
13
Trial:
June 11, 2012
December 2, 2011
December 16, 2011
March 16, 2012
14
WHEREAS the Court entered a further order on November 14, 2011 (Dkt No. 130)
15
granting the parties’ stipulation to permit fact depositions to be completed by December 9, 2011;
16
WHEREAS the Court entered a further order on November 28, 2011 (Dkt. No. 142)
17
granting the parties’ stipulation to permit them to supplement their expert reports in light of a
18
deposition that has not yet been taken because it is the subject of pending motion practice;
19
WHEREAS when the parties previously stipulated to move the deadline for disclosure of
20
their experts and expert reports to December 16, 2011, they did not believe that any fact
21
depositions would occur during the week of December 5, 2011, and accordingly believed that
22
they would have more time during the week of December 5 to focus on their expert reports;
23
WHEREAS the parties have since scheduled Rule 30(b)(6) depositions of each other for
24
December 9, 2011, and accordingly they have had less time than previously anticipated during the
25
week of December 5, 2011 to devote to their expert reports, and their experts will have less time
26
than previously anticipated to incorporate any testimonial evidence from those depositions into
27
their reports;
28
15887273.2
1
CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CERTAIN CASE DEADLINES
Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document157
1
Filed12/08/11 Page3 of 4
WHEREAS counsel for both parties have travel plans around the holidays in late
2
December 2011 and the New Year, and anticipate that their experts and/or support staff do as
3
well, which will interfere with the ability to prepare rebuttal expert reports;
4
WHEREAS the parties believe that there is room in the current case schedule to extend
5
certain of the deadlines in order to lessen the burden on the parties, their counsel, and their
6
experts without affecting the trial date;
7
WHEREAS the parties believe that, in light of the foregoing, it makes sense to continue
8
the deadlines for (1) disclosure of experts and reports; (2) disclosure of rebuttal experts and
9
reports; (3) expert discovery cutoff; (4) completion of mediation; (5) dispositive motion hearing
10
date;
11
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE
12
PARTIES HERETO AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD THAT the following case deadlines
13
be continued as follows:
14
Disclosure of experts and reports:
15
Disclosure of rebuttal experts and reports:
16
Expert discovery cutoff:
17
Completion of mediation:
18
Dispositive motion hearing date:
19
December 22, 2011 (12:00 p.m.)
January 26, 2012
February 20, 2012
March 13, 2012
March 30, 2012 (9:00 a.m.)
All subsequent pretrial and trial dates are to remain the same.
20
21
Date: December 8, 2011
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
22
By:
23
/s/ James C. Rutten
James C. Rutten
24
Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO
BANK, N.A. (successor by merger to
WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.) and
METROPOLITAN WEST SECURITIES LLC
25
26
27
28
Date: December 8, 2011
BARGER & WOLEN LLP
2
CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CERTAIN CASE DEADLINES
Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document157
Filed12/08/11 Page4 of 4
1
By:
2
3
/s/ J. Russell Stedman
J. Russell Stedman
Attorneys for Plaintiff STATE
COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND
4
5
* * * * *
6
7
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:
8
9
DATED: December 9, 2011
__________________________________
The Honorable Jeffrey S. White
United States District Court Judge
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CERTAIN CASE DEADLINES
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?