Chang v. County of Santa Clara et al

Filing 33

ORDER Granting re 32 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Extend Discovery Deadline filed by Shiow-Huey Chang. Discovery due by 2/18/2016. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 10/22/2015. (amk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/22/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

JAMES McMANIS (40958)
TYLER ATKINSON (257997)
HILARY WEDDELL (293276)
McMANIS FAULKNER
50 W. San Fernando Street, 10th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
SHIOW-HUEY CHANG

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

SHIOW-HUEY CHANG,
Plaintiff,

12
vs.

13

Case No. Case No. 15-cv-02502 RMW (NC)
STIPULATION TO EXTEND
DISCOVERY DEADLINE; [PROPOSED]
ORDER

14 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, a public
entity, SANTA CLARA COUNTY
15 SHERIFF’S OFFICE, a department of the
County of Santa Clara, DEPUTY DANIEL J.
16 FOREST, an individual, DEPUTY
STRICKLAND, an individual, and DOES 117 50, inclusive,
Defendants.

18
19
20

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 29, and Civil Local Rules 6-2 and 7-

21
22

12, Plaintiff, Shiow-Huey Chang, and Defendants hereby request an extension of the fact

23

discovery cut-off in this case. Under the Order After Initial Case Management Conference, the

24

current fact discovery deadline is November 25, 2015. The parties request the deadline be

25

extended to February 18, 2016.

26

///

27

///

28

///
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER;
Case No.: 15-cv-02502 RMW (NC)

1

REASONS FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME

2

This action commenced on June 5, 2015. Defendants filed an answer to the complaint on

3

July 1, 2015. The Initial Case Management Conference (“initial CMC”) was held on September

4

14, 2015.

5

The parties sought discovery at their earliest opportunity, and discovery has continued in

6

earnest. Pursuant to the Court’s order following the initial CMC, fact discovery is scheduled to

7

close next month. However, the parties believe their preparation for trial would benefit from

8

additional time to conduct fact discovery.

9

In addition, during discovery, plaintiff has ascertained the names of percipient witnesses,

10

all employees or former employees of the defendant County of Santa Clara. An enlargement of

11

the deadline to complete discovery will allow the parties to select deposition dates convenient to

12

counsel and the witnesses.

13

Lastly, this matter is scheduled for a settlement conference before Magistrate Nathanael

14

Cousins on December 8, 2015. The parties would like to reserve the possibility to conduct

15

discovery after the settlement conference, and thereby conserve resources in the event the matter

16

settles in December.

17

ALL PREVIOUS TIME MODIFICATIONS

18

There have been no time modifications in this case to date.

19

///

20

///

21

///

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

2
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER;
Case No.: 15-cv-02502 RMW (NC)

1

EFFECT OF REQUESTED TIME MODIFICATION

2

This request would have no effect on other deadlines previously set by the Court.

3

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

4
5

DATED: October 19, 2015

McMANIS FAULKNER

6
7

/s/
JAMES McMANIS

8

Attorneys for Plaintiff

9
10

DATED: October 19, 2015

11

/s/
DAVID ROLLO
Attorneys for Defendants

12
13
14
15

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17
18

10/22/2015
DATED: _______________

___________________________
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE; [PROPOSED] ORDER;
Case No.: 15-cv-02502 RMW (NC)