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
Mar 10, 2015
1:08-cv-00714-LJO-GSA (E.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 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.

          Charles C. Correll, Jr., Attorneys for Defendant, CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.

          SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP, JEFFREY J. PARKER, Attorney for Defendants, EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION.

          HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP, COLLEEN P. DOYLE, Attorneys for Defendant, 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 than the two weeks previously agreed upon in the February 18, 2015, Stipulation and Order.

         WHEREAS, the parties are 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 8, 2015, to file its opposition to any cost bills, and defendants will have up to, and including, April 29, 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
Mar 10, 2015
1:08-cv-00714-LJO-GSA (E.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 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: Mar 10, 2015

Citations

1:08-cv-00714-LJO-GSA (E.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2015)