City of Oakland v. SSA Terminals, LLC et al
Filing
111
ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers Denying 110 Fourth Stipulation (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/29/2012)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
5
6
7
CITY OF OAKLAND, a Municipal
Corporation, Acting By and Through Its Board
of Port Commissioners,
Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant,
8
9
10
11
Case No.: 11-01446-YGR
ORDER REGARDING FOURTH STIPULATION
FURTHER AMENDING TRIAL-RELATED
DATES
v.
SSA TERMINALS, LLC, et al.,
Defendants-Counterclaimants.
Northern District of California
United States District Court
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The Court has received the parties’ Fourth Stipulation Further Amending Trial-Related Dates.
(Dkt. No. 110.) The Court does not have any available dates in the three months following the
currently-scheduled January 14, 2013 trial date. The parties’ request for a trial continuance and to
extend the close of discovery is hereby DENIED. If the parties would like a trial continuance, the
Court encourages them to consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge who can guarantee their
desired trial date. Counsel are ordered to discuss this option with their clients, and then the parties
shall meet and confer regarding same. The Court will accept requests for assignment to a specific
magistrate judge or magistrate judges. When the parties meet and confer, the parties also must
discuss the parties’ availabilities for alternate trial dates.
The parties’ request to extend the deadline for responsive reports to rebuttal experts until
December 7, 2012 is GRANTED. The Case Management Conference on November 19, 2012 will
proceed as scheduled. This Order terminates Dkt. No. 110.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
27
28
Dated: October 29, 2012
_________________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
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?