State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Metropolitan West Securities LLC et al

Filing 64

ORDER GRANTING 62 Stipulation Continuing Case Deadlines, as Modified. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on December 21, 2010. (jswlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/21/2010)

Download PDF
State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Metropolitan West Securities LLC et al Doc. 64 Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document62 Filed12/21/10 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP Marc T.G. Dworsky (SB# 157413) James C. Rutten (SB# 201791) Eric P. Tuttle (SB# 248440) Melissa L. Camacho-Cheung (SB# 264024) 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 eric.tuttle@mto.com, melissa.camacho-cheung@mto.com Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. (successor by merger to WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.) and METROPOLITAN WEST SECURITIES LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Plaintiff, vs. METROPOLITAN WEST SECURITIES LLC; WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.; DOES 1 through 10, inclusive; and DOES 11 through 20, inclusive, Defendants. CASE NO. CV 09-02959 JSW (EDL) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE DEADLINES AS MODIFIED [Declaration of James C. Rutten filed concurrently herewith] 12499156.1 CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE DEADLINES Dockets.Justia.com Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document62 Filed12/21/10 Page2 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS the Court entered a stipulated order on November 1, 2010 providing the following case schedule: Fact discovery cutoff: Disclosure of experts and reports: Disclosure of rebuttal experts and reports: Expert discovery cutoff: Completion of mediation: Dispositive motion hearing date: Final pretrial conference: Trial: March 18, 2011 March 25, 2011 April 13, 2011 May 3, 2011 May 31, 2010 June 10, 2011 August 1, 2011 August 22, 2011 WHEREAS the parties have been diligently engaged in discovery, including significant written discovery, third-party subpoenas, and the production of both paper and electronic documents (including the recent production of more than 85,000 pages of electronic documents); WHEREAS the parties are continuing their document production efforts, and expect substantial additional productions to take place in the near future; WHEREAS the parties filed cross-motions to compel, which were heard on December 7, 2010 by the Magistrate Judge; WHEREAS the Magistrate Judge provided guidance to the parties on the discovery issues raised in the cross-motions, including as to which categories of documents should be produced, which custodians' electronic files should be searched, and which electronic search terms should be used to locate potentially responsive documents; WHEREAS the Magistrate Judge ordered the parties to meet and confer further in an effort to resolve the discovery disputes in light of the guidance provided; WHEREAS the parties expect that, as a result, substantial additional document production efforts will be undertaken that will be over and above the currently in-process productions; WHEREAS Defendants' counsel have numerous commitments in the final months of the existing discovery period that will substantially affect counsel's ability to complete discovery efforts, including but not limited to (1) a trial in a patent case pending in the United States District 12499156.1 1 CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE DEADLINES Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document62 Filed12/21/10 Page3 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Court for the District of Delaware, (2) class certification proceedings (and associated expert discovery) in two complex mortgage-backed securities cases pending in the United States District Courts for the Northern District of California and the Southern District of New York; (3) motions to remand and motions to dismiss in two other complex mortgage-backed securities cases pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; and (4) class certification proceedings (and associated discovery) in a securities-related case pending in the Complex Litigation Department of the Santa Clara County Superior Court. WHEREAS the parties believe that, in light of the foregoing, it makes sense to continue the existing case deadlines by approximately two months; NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD THAT the existing case deadlines shall be continued by approximately two months, such that the new schedule shall be as follows: Fact discovery cutoff: Disclosure of experts and reports: Disclosure of rebuttal experts and reports: Expert discovery cutoff: Completion of mediation: Dispositive motion hearing date: Final pretrial conference: Trial: May 25, 2011 June 1, 2011 June 20, 2011 July 13, 2011 August 12, 2011 August 26, 2011 (9:00 a.m.) October 17 October 7, 2011 (2:00 p.m.) 8:00 a.m. November 7, 2011 (8:30 a.m.) Date: December 20, 2010 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP By: /s/ James C. Rutten James C. Rutten Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. (successor by merger to WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.) and METROPOLITAN WEST SECURITIES LLC 12499156.1 2 CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE DEADLINES Case3:09-cv-02959-JSW Document62 Filed12/21/10 Page4 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Date: December 20, 2010 BARGER & WOLEN LLP By: /s/ Travis R. Wall Travis R. Wall Attorneys for Plaintiff STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND ***** PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: DATED: December 21, 2010 __________________________________ The Honorable Jeffrey S. White United States District Court Judge 12499156.1 3 CASE NO. CV 09-2959 JSW (EDL) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING 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?