Perritt et al v. The Cupcakery, et al
Filing
100
Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct 67 Scheduling Order, by Buster Baking, Ricky B Perritt, The Cupcakery, The Woodlands Baking, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Barnes, Stephanie)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
RICKY B. PERRITT, Individually;
THE CUPCAKERY, LLC, a Texas Limited
Liability Company; BUSTER BAKING,
LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company;
THE WOODLANDS BAKING, LLC,
a Texas Limited Liability Company;
CUSTOM VERSION CORPORATION,
a Texas Corporation
Plaintiffs,
v.
PAMELA F. JENKINS, Individually; and
THE CUPCAKERY LLC, a Nevada
Limited Liability Company
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 4:11-CV-23
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO AMEND SCHEDULING/DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
Plaintiffs RICKY B. PERRITT, Individually, THE CUPCAKERY, LLC, a Texas
Limited Liability Company, BUSTER BAKING, LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company,
THE WOODLANDS BAKING, LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company, and CUSTOM
VERSION CORPORATION, a Texas Corporation, by and through their attorneys, hereby file
this Unopposed Motion to Amend the Scheduling/Docket Control Order in this case (Docket No.
67).
Plaintiffs request that all remaining deadlines (with the exception of the deadline to
complete required mediation) contained in the Scheduling/Docket Control Order (Docket No.
67) be extended by ten weeks respectively so that they fall in the same order.
Plaintiffs seek an extension of:
1
Specifically,
(1) The deadline to exchange privilege logs to October 17, 2011;
(2) The deadline to designate expert witnesses and reports on issues for which the party
bears the burden of proof to November 16, 2011;
(3) The deadline to designate expert witnesses and reports on issues for which the party
does not bear the burden of proof to December 16, 2011;
(4) The deadline to file any objections to or motions to strike or exclude expert testimony
to January 30, 2012;
(5) The discovery deadline to January 16, 2012;
(6) The deadline for dispositive motions to January 30, 2012;
(7) The deadline for pretrial disclosures to March 16, 2012;
(8) The deadline to file pretrial materials to April 16, 2012; and
(9) Pretrial conference and trial setting at a date and time set at the Court’s convenience
on or after May 14, 2012.
Plaintiffs do not wish to amend the deadline to complete required mediation which
should remain November 14, 2011. Plaintiffs submit that the interests of justice will be served
and that good cause is shown by extending all remaining deadlines so that the parties can attempt
to settle the case before incurring significant costs associated with preparing for trial by
participating in Court-ordered mediation on or before November 14, 2011. Defendants, by and
through their counsel, do not oppose the relief requested in this motion.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek modification of the Scheduling/Docket Control Order
extending all remaining deadlines (with the exception of the deadline to complete required
mediation) ten weeks.
2
Respectfully submitted,
SIEBMAN, BURG, PHILLIPS & SMITH, LLP
/s/ Stephanie R. Barnes
CLYDE M. SIEBMAN
State Bar No. 18341600
BRYAN H. BURG
State Bar No. 03374500
STEPHANIE R. BARNES
State Bar No. 24045696
Federal Courthouse Square
300 North Travis Street
Sherman, Texas 75090
Telephone: (903) 870-0070
Facsimile: (903) 870-0066
clydesiebman@siebman.com
bryanburg@siebman.com
stephaniebarnes@siebman.com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that on this 4th day of August, 2011, all counsel of record who
are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document
through the Court’s CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). Any other counsel of record
will be served by a facsimile transmission and/or first class mail.
/s/ Stephanie R. Barnes
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?