Opinion
NO. 2:10-CV-00826 JAM KJN
08-01-2011
JAMES GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SACRAMENTO; City of Sacramento Chief of Police RICHARD BRAZIEL (Badge #5030); City of Sacramento Police Officer GARY DAHL (Badge #0672); and DOES I through XX, inclusive, Defendants.
LAW OFFICE OF STEWART KATZ STEWART KATZ, Attorney for Plaintiffs EILEEN M. TEICHERT City Attorney SHERI M. CHAPMAN Senior Deputy City Attorney Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF SACRAMENTO, RICHARD BRAZIEL and GARY DAHL
LAW OFFICE OF STEWART KATZ
Stewart Katz, SBN # 127425
Guy Danilowitz, SBN # 257733
Attorneys for Plaintiff
James Garcia
CITY OF SACRAMENTO
EILEEN M. TEICHERT, City Attorney (SBN 167027)
SHERI M. CHAPMAN, Senior Deputy City Attorney (SBN 215775)
Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.
STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
COME NOW THE PARTIES by and through their respective parties and subject to the approval of this Court, hereby stipulate and respectfully request the following modifications and/or amendments to this Court's Pretrial Scheduling Order of July 9, 2010, regarding the scheduling of this case:
• That the discovery cut-off date currently set for November 18, 2011 be moved to February 17, 2012.
• That the expert witness disclosure cut-off date currently set for September 16, 2011 be moved to December 16, 2011.
• That the supplemental expert witness disclosure cut-off date currently set for September 23, 2011 be moved to December 23, 2011.
• That the Dispositive Motion cut-off date currently set for December 14, 2011 be moved to March 21, 2012.
• That the date for hearing dispositive motions currently set for January 11, 2012 be moved to April 18, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.
• That the Final Pretrial Conference currently set for February 24, 2012 at 3:00 p.m. be moved to May 25, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.
• That the Trial currently set for April 2, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. be moved to July 16, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.
This calendaring modification is requested because the parties hope to resolve this matter through a private mediation which they are currently in the process of scheduling for the end of August, 2011. As a result, in the interest of conserving the resources of the Court in terms of settling discovery disputes which would become moot if the matter resolves, and in the interest of foregoing expenditures associated with additional discovery, the parties wish to postpone their efforts to conduct additional discovery and to resolve discovery disputes pending the mediation. Additionally, the parties believe that this would increase the likelihood of the case resolving as the parties would be able to put resources towards settlement that would otherwise need to go to litigating discovery disputes.
LAW OFFICE OF STEWART KATZ
STEWART KATZ,
Attorney for Plaintiffs
EILEEN M. TEICHERT
City Attorney
SHERI M. CHAPMAN
Senior Deputy City Attorney
Attorneys for Defendants
CITY OF SACRAMENTO, RICHARD
BRAZIEL and GARY DAHL
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The Honorable John A. Mendez
Judge of the U.S. District Court