From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Landslide Communications, Inc. v. State

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jun 17, 2013
2:13-cv-00716-GEB-KJN (E.D. Cal. Jun. 17, 2013)

Opinion

          KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672, Attorney General of California, MARK R. BECKINGTON, State Bar No. 126009, Supervising Deputy Attorney General BENJAMIN M. GLICKMAN, State Bar No. 247907, Deputy Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Defendants State of California, Kamala Harris, in her capacity as Attorney General of California, California Fair Political Practices Commission, and Ann Ravel, in her capacity as Chair of the Fair Political Practices Commission.

          THE SUTTON LAW FIRM, PC, BRADLEY W. HERTZ, Attorneys for Plaintiffs Landslide Communications, Inc. and James V. Lacy.


          STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

          GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., District Judge.

         WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' initial complaint was filed on April 11, 2013, at which time the Court entered an order setting a Status (Pretrial Conference) Conference for July 8, 2013, at 9:00 a.m., before the Honorable Garland E. Burrell, Jr.;

         WHEREAS, on June 6, 2013, prior to the due date for Defendants' response to the initial complaint, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint;

         WHEREAS, Defendants' response to the First Amended Complaint is currently due on or before June 27, 2013;

         WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court's Order setting the July 8, 2013 Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference, the parties are currently required to confer and develop a proposed discovery plan, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f), and submit a Joint Status Report to the Court before Defendants' response to the First Amended Complaint is due;

         WHEREAS, the parties are currently discussing Plaintiffs' new allegations to determine whether a resolution outside of litigation is possible;

         WHEREAS, the parties believe it would be in their best interests, as well as the interests of justice and judicial efficiency, to continue the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference and related deadlines;

         IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective counsel, that the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference be continued to August 5, 2013, or as soon thereafter as is convenient for the Court.

          ORDER

         The parties having so stipulated,

         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference currently set for July 8, 2013 be continued to August 5, 2013, at 9:00 a.m., before Judge Burrell in Courtroom 10 of the above-entitled court. A joint status report shall be filed fourteen days prior to the hearing. All other requirements of the Court's April 11, 2013 Order Setting Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference remain in effect.


Summaries of

Landslide Communications, Inc. v. State

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jun 17, 2013
2:13-cv-00716-GEB-KJN (E.D. Cal. Jun. 17, 2013)
Case details for

Landslide Communications, Inc. v. State

Case Details

Full title:LANDSLIDE COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF…

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

Date published: Jun 17, 2013

Citations

2:13-cv-00716-GEB-KJN (E.D. Cal. Jun. 17, 2013)