Hamilton v. The Regents of the University of California et al
Filing
49
ORDER re 48 Stipulation. Further Case Management Conference set for 12/14/2011 01:30 PM. Case Management Statement due by 12/7/2011. Discovery due by 12/14/2011. Expert Witness List due by 12/14/2011. Expert Discovery due by 1/13/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 11/01/2011. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/1/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
LOUIS A. LEONE, ESQ. (SBN: 099874)
CLAUDIA LEED, ESQ. (SBN: 122676)
STUBBS & LEONE
A Professional Corporation
2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 900
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 974-8600
Facsimile:
(925) 974-8601
E-mail: leonel@stubbsleone.com
leedc@stubbsleone.com
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Attorneys for Defendants
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
PAMELA E. ROSKOWSKI, JON EASTERBROOK, and
BARNEY RIVERA
PAMELA Y. PRICE, ESQ. (SBN:107713)
PRICE AND ASSOCIATES
901 Clay Street
Oakland, California 94607
Telephone: (510) 452-0292
Facsimile: (510) 452-5625
E-mail: pamela.price@pypesq.com
15
16
Attorneys for Plaintiff
REGGIE HAMILTON
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
CURTIS E. ALLEN, ESQ. (SBN: 187748)
LAW OFFICE OF CURTIS ALLEN
303 Twin Dolphin Drive, Sixth Floor
Redwood City, California 94065
Telephone: (650) 868-6620
Facsimile: (650) 362-1864
E-mail: curtis.e.allen.esq.@gmail.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
REGGIE HAMILTON
24
25
26
27
28
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Case No.: C10-01622 DMR
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
RESCHEDULING THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
1
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
REGGIE HAMILTON,
Plaintiff,
5
6
vs.
7
8
9
10
11
Case No.: C10-01622 DMR
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED
ORDER RESCHEDULING THE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
CONTINUING DISCOVERY
DEADLINES AS MODIFIED
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA, PAMELA E. ROSKOWSKI,
JON EASTERBROOK, BARNEY RIVERA
and DOES 1 through 15,
Defendants.
12
13
The parties to the above captioned action hereby stipulate by and through their
14
undersigned counsel of record to request that this court continue the 1:30 p.m.
15
November 2, 2011 Case Management Conference to 1:30 p.m. December 14, 2011, or
16
as soon thereafter as it may please the Court.
17
The parties also hereby stipulate by and through their undersigned counsel of
18
record to request that this court continue the lay and expert witness discovery deadlines
19
by approximately thirty days as set for the below.
20
Good cause exists for the above requests, as follows:
21
1. At the October 11, 2011 settlement conference before Magistrate Judge
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Joseph C. Spero the parties reached a settlement in principle.
2. At the settlement conference the parties set a three week check-in time
(November 1, 2011) with Magistrate Judge Spero.
3. On October 11, 2011 the parties stayed ongoing discovery for three weeks to
November 1, 2011 in light of the settlement in principle.
4. The parties are currently working on the details of settlement, some of which
require the Regents to seek detailed internal guidance.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Case No.: C10-01622 DMR
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
RESCHEDULING THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
2
1
5. It is anticipated that a completed settlement agreement will be executed by all
2
parties on or before November 20, 2011, and that the completed settlement
3
agreement will obviate the need for further litigation in the matter.
4
6. The deadline to complete lay discovery and designate expert witnesses is
5
currently November 7, 2011, and the deadline to complete expert witness
6
discovery is December 5, 2011.
7
7. The last day to hear dispositive motions is January 5, 2012 and the Final
8
Pretrial Conference Statement and Trial Briefs are due February 4, 2012.
9
8. Continuing the lay discovery and expert witness disclosure deadline to
10
December 14, 2011 and the completion of expert discovery to January 13,
11
2012 will allow the parties to focus all of their attention on settlement the
12
matter.
13
Given all of the above, a continuance of the Case Management Conference and
14
Discovery deadlines will serve judicial economy and spare the parties considerable and
15
likely needless discovery-related expense.
16
17
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
DATED: October 31, 2011
PRICE AND ASSOCIATES
18
19
/S/
_______
PAMELA Y. PRICE, ESQ.
Attorneys for Plaintiff REGGIE
HAMILTON
20
21
22
DATED: October 31, 2011
LAW OFFICE OF CURTIS E. ALLEN
23
24
25
26
___________/S/__________________
CURTIS E. ALLEN, ESQ.
Attorneys for Plaintiff REGGIE
HAMILTON
27
28
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Case No.: C10-01622 DMR
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
RESCHEDULING THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
3
1
DATED: October 31, 2011
STUBBS & LEONE
2
3
/S/
CLAUDIA LEED, ESQ.
Attorneys for Defendants THE
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA,
PAMELA E. ROSKOWSKI, JON
EASTERBROOK, and BARNEY
RIVERA
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
The 1:30 p.m. November 2, 2011 Case Management Conference is continued to
11
1:30 p.m. December 14, 2011. An updated joint Case Management Conference
12
statement shall be filed by December 7, 2011. The deadline to complete all lay
13
discovery and to designate expert witnesses is continued to December 14, 2011. The
14
deadline to complete expert witness discovery is continued to January 13, 2012.
15
16
17
DATED:
November 1, 2011
DONNA M. RYU
United States Magistrate Judge
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Case No.: C10-01622 DMR
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
RESCHEDULING THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND DISCOVERY DEADLINES
4
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?