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)
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?