Costco Wholesale Corporation v. Arrowood Indemnity Company

Filing 21

STIPULATION AND ORDER to Continue Expert Witness Report Deadline re parties' 20 Stipulation; Expert Witness Reports due by 7/5/2018, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT)

Download PDF
Honorable Robert S. Lasnik UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 2:17-cv-01212-RSL STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS REPORT DEADLINE ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY, Defendant. Pursuant to LCR 7(d)(1) and LCR 10(g), Plaintiff Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”) and Defendant Arrowood Indemnity Company (“Arrowood”), by and through their attorneys of record, hereby submit this Stipulated Motion and [Proposed] Order to Continue the Expert Witness Report Deadline. The parties have met and conferred, and submit this Stipulated Motion in good faith. DISCUSSION By its Minute Order Setting Trial Date & Related Dates (ECF No. 13), the Court set this matter for trial on November 5, 2018 and also established a case schedule of pretrial deadlines. On April 19, 2018, the Court entered the Parties’ first extension of time for certain pretrial deadlines (ECF No. 19), including, among others, an extension of the deadline for expert witness reports from May 9, 2018 to June 20, 2018. To date, the Parties have engaged in substantial written discovery and have taken the depositions of several party witnesses. Arrowood has taken the deposition of one of Costco’s witnesses and Costco has taken the deposition of two of Arrowood’s witnesses. The Parties have scheduled additional depositions in the case for June 14, 2018 and June 27, 2018. These depositions may provide testimony for the Parties’ experts to rely upon in their respective reports. In light of the upcoming depositions and expert witness report deadline in the case, the Parties stipulate and jointly move the Court for a brief two-week continuance of the expert witness report deadline for purposes of completing depositions to Thursday, July 5, 2018. The Parties do not request that the Court continue the trial date or any other dates unless specified herein. Accordingly, the Parties respectfully request that this Stipulated Motion be approved and that the Court agree to continue the expert witness report deadline to Thursday, July 5, 2018. IT IS SO STIPULATED THIS 7th day of June, 2018. DATED: June 7, 2018 CLYDE & CO US LLP /s/ Alexander E. Potente Alexander E. Potente, WSBA #48858 alex.potente@clydeco.us 601 Union Street, Two Union Square, 42nd Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 Phone (206) 652-3237 Fax (206) 652-3237 Attorneys for Defendant ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY 3855054 STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS REPORT DEADLINE (2:17-cv01212-RSL) - CLYDE & CO US LLP 601 Union Street, Two Union Square, 42nd Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 652-3237 DATED: June 7, 2018 PACIFICA LAW GROUP LLP /s/ Paul J. Lawrence Paul J. Lawrence, WSBA #13557 Matthew J. Segal, WSBA #29797 Nicholas W. Brown, WSBA #33586 1191 Second Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 245-1700 Fax: (206) 245-1750 Attorneys for Plaintiff COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION 3855054 STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS REPORT DEADLINE (2:17-cv01212-RSL) - CLYDE & CO US LLP 601 Union Street, Two Union Square, 42nd Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 652-3237 ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Stipulated Motion to continue the expert witness report deadline is GRANTED. The new date for the expert witness report deadline is Thursday, July 5, 2018. DATED this 8th day of June, 2018. A Honorable Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge 3855054 STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS REPORT DEADLINE (2:17-cv01212-RSL) - CLYDE & CO US LLP 601 Union Street, Two Union Square, 42nd Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 652-3237

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?