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)

Download PDF
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?