Longs Drug Stores California, L.L.C. et al v. City of Sebastopol et al

Filing 72

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 71 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Continuing Discovery Deadlines filed by Longs Drug Stores California, L.L.C., Armstrong Development Properties. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/2/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/2/2014)

Download PDF
1 ROBERT R. MOORE (BAR NO. 113818) DAVID H. BLACKWELL (BAR NO. 153354) 2 MICHAEL J. BETZ (BAR NO. 196228) CATHY A. HONGOLA-BAPTISTA (BAR NO. 234489) 3 ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP 4 Three Embarcadero Center, 12th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-4074 5 Phone: (415) 837-1515 Fax: (415) 837-1516 6 E-Mail: rmoore@allenmatkins.com dblackwell@allenmatkins.com mbetz@allenmatkins.com 7 chongola@allenmatkins.com 8 Attorneys for Defendant 9 LONGS DRUG STORES CALIFORNIA, L.L.C. and ARMSTRONG DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES, 10 INC. 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 14 LONGS DRUG STORES CALIFORNIA, L.L.C., a California limited liability 15 company, and ARMSTRONG DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES, INC., a 16 Pennsylvania corporation, Plaintiffs and Petitioners, 17 18 Case No. 3:13-cv-01383 EMC JOINT STIPULATION CONTINUING DISCOVERY DEADLINES; [PROPOSED] ORDER Ctrm: 5 Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen v. 19 CITY OF SEBASTOPOL, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 20 SEBASTOPOL, and GLENN SCHAINBLATT, in his official capacity as 21 Building Official of the City of Sebastopol, Defendants and Respondents. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 919357.02/SF Case No. 3:13-cv-01383 EMC Joint Stipulation Continuing Discovery Deadlines; [Proposed Order] STIPULATION 1 2 1. On November 5, 2013, the Court enter a Case Management and Pretrial 3 Order for Jury Trial (the "Order"). (Dkt. No. 38.) Pursuant to the Order, various discovery 4 deadlines were established. 5 2. On January 9, 2014, Defendants and Respondents City of Sebastopol, City 6 Council of the City of Sebastopol and Glenn Schainblatt (collectively, "Defendants") filed 7 a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, set for hearing on February 13, 2014. (Dkt. No. 8 42.) A Case Management hearing was also set to take place on February 13, 2014. Both 9 the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and the Case Management hearing were 10 subsequently continued to February 20, 2014. 11 3. On January 16, 2014, pursuant to a stipulation and order, Plaintiffs and 12 Petitioners Longs Drug Stores California, LLC and Armstrong Development Properties, 13 Inc. (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed their First Amended Verified Complaint for Injunctive 14 Relief and Damages; Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate (Dkt. No. 47) in this Court 15 against Defendants. 16 4. On February 12, 2014, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause Regarding 17 This Court's Jurisdiction Over Plaintiffs' Writ of Mandate Claims (the "OSC"). (Dkt No. 18 61.) The OSC vacated the hearing on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. The 19 Court also continued the Case Management to March 27, 2014. 20 5. On March 6, 2014, the Court re-set the Motion for Partial Summary 21 Judgment for April 24, 2014. On March 7, 2014, the Court re-set the March 27, 2014 Case 22 Management hearing for April 24, 2014. 23 6. Based on the issuance of the OSC and the procedural posture of the case, the 24 parties' shared understanding was that expert and non-expert discovery deadlines in the 25 Order would be continued. As such, the parties have not engaged in active discovery 26 while the OSC has been pending. 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 919357.02/SF -2- Case No. 3:13-cv-01383 EMC Joint Stipulation Continuing Discovery Deadlines; [Proposed Order] 1 NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 2 1. If the Court maintains jurisdiction over this case, the expert and non-expert 3 discovery deadlines in the Order (Dkt. No. 38) should be continued and re-set at the April 4 24, 2014 Case Management hearing. 5 2. All other hearing dates and deadlines established in the Order (Dkt. No. 38) 6 should likewise be continued and re-set at the April 24, 2014 Case Management hearing. 7 Dated: April 1, 2014 8 9 10 ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP ROBERT R. MOORE DAVID H. BLACKWELL MICHAEL J. BETZ By: /s/ Cathy A. Hongola-Baptista CATHY A. HONGOLA-BAPTISTA Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Petitioners LONGS DRUG STORES CALIFORNIA, L.L.C. and ARMSTRONG DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES, INC. 11 12 13 14 15 Dated: April 1, 2014 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON 16 By: /s/ Edward Grutzmacher EDWARD GRUTZMACHER Attorneys for Defendants and Respondents CITY OF SEBASTOPOL, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL, and GLENN SCHAINBLATT 17 18 19 20 21 22 I hereby attest that I have on file all holographic signatures corresponding to any 23 signatures indicated by a conformed signature (/s/) within this e-filed document. 24 Dated: April 1, 2014 ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP 25 By: /s/ Cathy A. Hongola-Baptista CATHY A. HONGOLA-BAPTISTA Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Petitioners 26 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 919357.02/SF -3- Case No. 3:13-cv-01383 EMC Joint Stipulation Continuing Discovery Deadlines; [Proposed Order] [Proposed] ORDER 1 2 PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED THAT: 3 1. The non-expert and expert discovery deadlines set forth in Case Management and 4 Pretrial Order for Jury Trial (Dkt. No. 38) are hereby VACATED. New non-expert and expert discovery deadlines will be established at the April 24, S D RDERE Hon. Edward M. Chen IS SO O IT Judge, United States District Court RT 11 dwar Judge E ER 13 A H 12 en d M. Ch NO 10 FO 9 4/2/14 UNIT ED 8 Dated: RT U O 7 S DISTRICT TE C TA R NIA 6 2014 Case Management hearing. LI 2. 5 N F D IS T IC T O R C 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 919357.02/SF -4- Case No. 3:13-cv-01383 EMC Joint Stipulation Continuing Discovery Deadlines; [Proposed Order]

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?