From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

City of Merced Redevelopment Agency v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Apr 3, 2015
1:08-cv-00714-LJO-GSA (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2015)

Opinion

          Duane C. Miller, Michael D. Axline, Tracey L. O'Reilly, Molly McGinley Han, MILLER & AXLINE, A Professional Corporation, Sacramento, CA Attorneys for Plaintiff City of Merced Redevelopment Agency.

          SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP, WHITNEY JONES ROY, Attorneys for Defendant EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION.

          KING & SPALDING LLP, Jeremiah J. Anderson, Attorneys for Defendant CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.

          HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP, COLLEEN P. DOYLE, Attorney for Defendants TESORO CORPORATION AND TESORO REFINING AND MARKETING COMPANY.

          SEDGWICK LLP, PETER C. CONDRON, Attorney for Defendants SHELL OIL COMPANY AND EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC.


          STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINES FOR FILING OF COST BILLS AND OBJECTIONS

          LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.

         Defendants Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Exxon Mobil Corporation (formerly known as Exxon Corporation), Shell Oil Company, Equilon Enterprises LLC, Tesoro Corporation, and Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company (collectively, "Defendants") and plaintiff Merced Designated Local Authority, as successor agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Merced ("Plaintiff") submit the following stipulation:

         WHEREAS, on February 4, 2015, the Court granted in part Defendants' motion for summary judgment (CM/ECF Document No. 118) and the Clerk entered judgment in accordance therewith (CM/ECF Document No. 119).

         WHEREAS, Defendants filed four cost bills on March 4, 2015, two of which included substantial supporting documentation.

         WHEREAS, Plaintiff anticipates that it will need more time to respond than previously agreed upon in the March 10, 2015, Stipulation and Order.

         WHEREAS, the parties are still actively engaged in discussions that, if successful, would resolve all cost bills and appeals, and that these discussions will require approval of the parties' respective clients and oversight boards.

         THEREFORE, the parties stipulate Plaintiff will have up to, and including, Wednesday, April 29, 2015, to file its opposition to any cost bills, and defendants will have up to, and including, May 20, 2015, to file any responses to Plaintiff's objections.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

City of Merced Redevelopment Agency v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Apr 3, 2015
1:08-cv-00714-LJO-GSA (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2015)
Case details for

City of Merced Redevelopment Agency v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

Case Details

Full title:CITY OF MERCED REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, et. al., Plaintiff, v. EXXON MOBIL…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Fresno Division

Date published: Apr 3, 2015

Citations

1:08-cv-00714-LJO-GSA (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2015)