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)

Download PDF
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?