GALLO CATTLE COMPANY v. SAPUTO DAIRY FOODS USA, LLC

Case No. 1:16-cv-01673-LJO-EPG.

GALLO CATTLE COMPANY d/b/a JOSEPH GALLO FARMS, a California limited partnership, Plaintiff, v. SAPUTO DAIRY FOODS USA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendant. AND RELATED COUNTER-CLAIMS.

United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Contract Dispute
Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gallo Cattle Company, Plaintiff, represented by Benjamin Thomas Nicholson , McCormick Barstow Sheppard Wayte & Carruth, LLP.

Gallo Cattle Company, Plaintiff, represented by Marshall Craig Whitney , The Martin Law Firm & Shane Garrett Smith , McCormick Barstow LLP.

Saputo Dairy Foods USA, LLC, Defendant, represented by Marc R. Lewis , Lewis & Llewellyn, LLP, Evangeline A.Z. Burbidge , Lewis & Llewellyn LLP & Paul T. Llewellyn , Lewis & Llewellyn, LLP.

Saputo Dairy Foods USA, LLC, Counter Claimant, represented by Marc R. Lewis , Lewis & Llewellyn, LLP & Paul T. Llewellyn , Lewis & Llewellyn, LLP.

Gallo Cattle Company, Counter Defendant, represented by Benjamin Thomas Nicholson , McCormick Barstow Sheppard Wayte & Carruth, LLP, Marshall Craig Whitney , The Martin Law Firm & Shane Garrett Smith , McCormick Barstow LLP.

Saputo Dairy Foods USA, LLC, Counter Claimant, represented by Marc R. Lewis , Lewis & Llewellyn, LLP, Evangeline A.Z. Burbidge , Lewis & Llewellyn LLP & Paul T. Llewellyn , Lewis & Llewellyn, LLP.

Gallo Cattle Company, Counter Defendant, represented by Benjamin Thomas Nicholson , McCormick Barstow Sheppard Wayte & Carruth, LLP, Marshall Craig Whitney , The Martin Law Firm & Shane Garrett Smith , McCormick Barstow LLP.


STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER

ERICA P. GROSJEAN, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, GALLO CATTLE COMPANY d/b/a JOSEPH GALLO FARMS ("Gallo") and Defendant and Counter-Plaintiff SAPUTO DAIRY FOODS USA, LLC ("Saputo") respectfully submit this stipulated request that the Court grant a limited extension of the non-expert discovery period set forth in the Scheduling Conference Order (see ECF 15). In support of this stipulation, the parties state as follows:

1. The Court set a pretrial schedule in this case on January 24, 2017 (ECF 15), and discovery opened on February 10, 2017 with the parties' exchange of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) Initial Disclosures. Thereafter the parties have mutually responded to written discovery and produced documents in response to requests for production. No depositions have yet taken place nor are any scheduled at present.

2. Throughout the fact discovery period, the parties have informally discussed settlement in good faith without achieving a resolution on their own. The parties believe that the assistance of a mediator will be helpful, and have scheduled a mediation session before Hon. James A. Ardaiz (Ret.) in Fresno, California on June 30, 2017. Representatives from both parties with full settlement authority will be present at the mediation.

3. The parties are cautiously optimistic that a settlement of this action can be reached in connection with the June 30 mediation.

4. The parties respectfully request that the Court grant a 30-day extension of the fact discovery window in order to give the parties a chance to mediate this case prior to incurring the costs and burdens associated with fact depositions and expert discovery.

5. Pursuant to L.R. 144(b), the parties state that they have not previously requested an extension of time from the Court.

6. The proposed extension will not impact any deadlines before the Court.

7. Therefore, the parties respectfully request that the Scheduling Conference Order entered on January 24, 2017 be amended as follows:

Current Scheduling Order Proposed Scheduling Order Event Date Date 8/8/2017 Mid-Discovery Conference 6/19/2017 10:00 a.m, Dept. 10 Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff July 17, 2017 August 16, 2017 Expert Disclosure August 17, 2017 September 6, 2017 Rebuttal Expert Disclosure September 18, 2017 October 6, 2017 Expert Discovery Cutoff October 17, 2017 October 31, 2017 Dispositive Motion Deadline November 21, 2017 November 21, 2017 April 5, 2018 April 5, 2018 Pretrial Conference 11:00 a.m., Dept. 10 11:00 a.m., Dept. 10 June 5, 2018 June 5, 2018 Jury Trial 8:30 a.m., Dept. 10 8:30 a.m., Dept. 10

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION

I hereby attest that concurrence has been obtained from Evangeline A.Z. Burbidge, counsel for Saputo Dairy Foods USA, LLC, as indicated by a "conformed" signature (/s/) within this e-filed document.

/s/Shane G. Smith Shane G. Smith

ORDER

UPON CONSIDERATION of the Parties' Stipulation to Amend the Scheduling Order, and for good cause appearing, IT IS SO ORDERED that the Scheduling Conference Order governing the pretrial phase of the above-captioned litigation is amended as set forth above.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases