Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Rehrig Pac. Co.

Full title: Gerawan Farming, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Rehrig Pacific Company, and Does…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION

Date published: Jan 10, 2012

Case No. 11-cv-01273-LJO-BAM (E.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 11-cv-01273-LJO-BAM

01-10-2012

Gerawan Farming, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Rehrig Pacific Company, and Does 1-10, inclusive, Defendants.

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP Shannon S. King Attorneys for Plaintiff Gerawan Farming, Inc. SLATER HERSEY & LIEBERMAN LLP Jonathan P. Hersey Attorneys for Defendant Rehrig Pacific Company

Lawrence J. O'Neill

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

JILL M. PIETRINI (CA Bar No. 138335)

SHANNON S KING (CA Bar No. 233386)

Attorneys for Plaintiff

GERAWAN FARMING, INC.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

Judge.: Hon. Lawrence J. O'Neill

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(f), plaintiff Gerawan Farming, Inc. ("Gerawan") and defendant Rehrig Pacific Company ("Rehrig") hereby stipulate, subject to the Court's approval, that the hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss currently set for January 17, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. be continued to January 24, 2012 at 8:30 a.m.

On December 9, 2011, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss noticed for hearing on January 17, 2012, at 8:30 a.m. [Docket No. 11.]Plaintiff filed its opposition brief on January 3, 2012. [Docket No. 16.]

The parties request a continuance of the hearing on the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for scheduling reasons and unanticipated travel conflicts. The parties also note that the principals have recently agreed to meet in-person on January 23, 2012, and discuss this matter. This is the first extension of the Hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss requested.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between plaintiff and defendant, pursuant to Local Rule 230(f), that the hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss be continued to January 24, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. Defendant may file its reply not less than seven days preceding the date of such continued hearing, pursuant to Local Rule 230(d).

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

By _________

Shannon S. King

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Gerawan Farming, Inc.

SLATER HERSEY & LIEBERMAN LLP

By ____________

Jonathan P. Hersey

Attorneys for Defendant

Rehrig Pacific Company

ORDER

Pursuant to its practice, this Court will consider defendant's motion to dismiss on the ecord and:

1. VACATES the January 17, 2012 hearing; and
2. ORDERS defendants, no later than January 17, 2012, to file and serve reply papers
3. with points and authorities limited to no more than 10 pages

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE