Trustees of the Northern California Tile Industry Pension Trust Fund et al v. Peacock Tile and Marble, Inc. et al
Filing
38
CORRECTION OF DOCKET # 37 .ORDER re 36 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER filed by Trustees of the Northern California Tile Industry Pension Trust Fund, Trustees of the Northern California Tile Industry Apprenticeship and Traini ng Trust Fund, Trustees of the Northern California Tile Industry Labor Management Cooperation Trust Fund, Trustees of the Northern California Tile Industry Vacation and Holiday Trust Fund, Trustees of the Northern California Tile Industry Health and Welfare Trust Fund. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 10/31/2012. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2012) Modified on 10/31/2012 (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF).
Case4:11-cv-03859-DMR Document36-1 Filed10/30/12 Page1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
DAVIS, COWELL & BOWE, LLP
JOHN J. DAVIS, JR., SBN 65594 jjdavis@dcbsf.com
SARAH GROSSMAN-SWENSON, SBN 259792 sgs@dcbsf.com
595 Market Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel.: (415) 597-7200
Fax: (415) 597-7201
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
SWEENEY, MASON, WILSON & BOSOMWORTH
ROGER M. MASON, SBN 107486 rmason@smwb.com
983 University Avenue, Suite 104C
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Tel: (408) 356-3000
Fax: (408) 354-8839
Attorneys for Defendants
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
TRUSTEES of the NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
TILE INDUSTRY PENSION TRUST FUND;
TRUSTEES of the NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
TILE INDUSTRY HEALTH AND WELFARE
TRUST FUND; TRUSTEES of the NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA TILE INDUSTRY
APPRENTICESHIP AND TRAINING TRUST
FUND; TRUSTEES of the NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA TILE INDUSTRY VACATION
AND HOLIDAY TRUST FUND; and TRUSTEES
of the NORTHERN CALIFORNIA TILE
INDUSTRY LABOR MANAGEMENT
COOPERATION TRUST FUND;
22
Plaintiffs,
23
v.
24
25
26
27
28
PEACOCK TILE AND MARBLE, INC., a
California corporation; CHRISTYNE GRACE
PAVONE; and DOES 1-10,
Defendants.
) Case No. CV 11-3859 DMR
)
)
)
Modified
)
)
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON
)
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR
)
) RELIEF FROM DISCOVERY AND
)
EXPERT DEADLINES
)
)
)
Filed:
August 5, 2011
)
)
)
Judge: Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu
)
Courtroom No. 4
)
3rd Floor
)
)
Oakland Courthouse
)
1301 Clay Street
)
Oakland, CA 94612
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
/
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON STIPULATED REQUEST FOR RELIEF
FROM DISCOVERY AND EXPERT DEADLINES
Case No. CV 11-3859 DMR
Case4:11-cv-03859-DMR Document36-1 Filed10/30/12 Page2 of 2
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON STIPULATED REQUEST FOR RELIEF
2
FROM DISCOVERY AND EXPERT DEADLINES
3
On October 30, 2012, Plaintiffs and Defendants submitted to this Court, the Honorable
4
Donna M. Ryu presiding, the Parties’ Stipulated Request for Relief from Discovery and Expert
5
Deadlines. Having considered the papers and evidence submitted by the parties, all other
6
pleadings and records on file herein, and good cause appearing,
7
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
8
The Parties’ request for relief from the discovery and expert deadlines set out in the
9
November 21, 2012, Pretrial Order is GRANTED. The following discovery and expert deadlines
10
shall now apply:
11
1. All non-expert discovery shall be completed by 12/31/2012.
12
2. Experts shall be disclosed and reports provided by 12/31/12.
13
3. Rebuttal experts shall be disclosed and reports provided by 1/14/2012.
14
4. All discovery from experts shall be completed by 1/28/2012.
2/28/2013 at 11:00 a.m.
5. The last day for hearing dispositive motions shall be 2/27/2012.
16
21
RT
Respectfully submitted by:
DAVIS, COWELL & BOWE, LLP
24
25
26
ER
By:
A
H
22
23
_________________________________
u
THE HONORABLE a M. Ry M. RYU
onn DONNA
Judge D
United States Magistrate Judge
NO
October 31, 2012
Dated: ____________________
FO
19
D
RDERE
S SO O IED
IT I
DIF
AS MO
R NIA
UNIT
ED
18
20
S
IT IS SO ORDERED.
RT
U
O
17
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
LI
15
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
/s/ Sarah Grossman-Swenson
Sarah Grossman-Swenson
Attorney for Plaintiffs
27
28
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON STIPULATED REQUEST FOR RELIEF
FROM DISCOVERY AND EXPERT DEADLINES
Case No. CV 11-3859 DMR
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?