Guitron et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 105

ORDER Granting 79 Stipulation TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF DATE. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 12/20/2011. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Yosef Peretz (SBN 209288) Emily A. Knoles (SBN 241671) Michael D. Burstein (SBN 248516) PERETZ & ASSOCIATES 22 Battery Street, Suite 202 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415.732.3777 Facsimile: 415.372.3791 Attorneys for Plaintiffs YESENIA GUITRON and JUDI KLOSEK Baldwin J. Lee (Bar No. 187413) Alexander Nestor (Bar No. 202795) Amy Morgenstern (Bar No. 267412) ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP Three Embarcadero Center, 12th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-4074 Phone: (415) 837-1515 Fax: (415) 837-1516 E-Mail:blee@allenmatkins.com anestor@allenmatkins.com amorgenstern@allenmatkins.com Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., WELLS FARGO & CO. AND PAM RUBIO 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 19 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 20 21 CASE NO. CIV-10-03461 CW (MEJ) YESENIA GUITRON; and JUDI KLOSEK, 22 PARTIES' STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF DATE Plaintiffs, 23 24 v. 25 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; WELLS FARGO & CO.; PAM RUBIO; and DOES 120, 26 27 Defendants. 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF DATE -1- 1 Plaintiffs YESENIA GUITRON and JUDI KLOSEK and Defendants WELLS FARGO 2 BANK, N.A., WELLS FARGO & CO. and PAM RUBIO (collectively, “Defendants”) stipulate, 3 as follows: WHEREAS, the parties have designated seven expert witnesses, including three retained 4 experts and three non-retained experts Plaintiffs have designated and one retained expert 5 Defendants have designated; 6 7 WHEREAS, a dispute arose between the parties regarding whether Defendants were entitled to take a Rule 35 mental examination of Plaintiff Klosek; 8 9 WHEREAS, Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James ruled upon the parties' dispute in favor of Defendants on December 1, 2011; 10 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs intend to file a Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial 11 Order on Magistrate Judge James’ ruling of December 1, 2011 pursuant Civil Local Rule 72.2, 12 13 14 and thus are not scheduling Plaintiff Klosek's mental examination; WHEREAS, because of the unavailability of the expert witnesses and counsel in December 2011 and the dispute over the Rule 35 mental examination of Plaintiff Klosek, the parties still have to schedule and take the depositions of the seven expert witness that were 15 designated in this case, as well as schedule the mental examination of Plaintiff Klosek unless the 16 Court grants Plaintiffs' Civil Local Rule 72.2 Motion; 17 WHEREAS, the expert discovery cut-off date currently is December 16, 2011; 18 WHEREAS, the parties need an additional 45 days to complete expert discovery, 19 including the seven depositions and the mental examination; THEREFORE, the parties stipulate and respectfully ask the Court to grant a 45-day 20 21 extension of the expert discovery cut-off date to January 31, 2012. /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF DATE -2- 1 2 IT IS SO STIPULATED THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD: Dated: December 6, 2011 ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP 3 4 By: (-) Alexander Nestor ALEXANDER NESTOR Attorneys for Defendants 5 6 7 8 Dated: December 6, 2011 PERETZ & ASSOCIATES 9 10 By: (-) Yosef Peretz YOSEF PERETZ Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 12 13 14 15 [PROPOSED] ORDER 16 17 Pursuant to the parties' Stipulation, and Good Cause appearing therefor, the Court 18 hereby orders that the expert discovery cut-off date is continued from December 16, 2011, to 19 January 31, 2012. 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 20 Dated: December ___, 2011 By:____________________________ THE HON. CLAUDIA WILKEN U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF DATE -3-

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?