A.V. EX REL. VALERIO v. SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Case No. 2:15-cv-00889-KJM-AC.

T.V. and A.V. by and through their guardians Will Valerio and Jackie Valerio, and Will Valerio and Jackie Valerio, individually, D.S. by and through her guardian Arthur Aleman, I.M. and I.M. by and through their guardians Jorge Maranon and Isabella Maranon, Jorge Maranon and Isabella Maranon individually, D.S. by and through his guardians Adrian Sanchez and Stephanie Sanchez, J.S. by and through David Schnetz and Amy Schnetz, A.S. by and through her guardian Stacey Swett, Plaintiffs, v. SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

T. V., Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group.

T. V., Plaintiff, represented by Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

A. V., Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

D. S., Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

I. M., Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

J. S., Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Jorge Maranon, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Amy Schnetz, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Isabella Maranon, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Adrian Sanchez, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Arthur Aleman, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Will Valerio, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

David Schnetz, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Jackie Valerio, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Stephanie Sanchez, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

A. S., Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Stacey Swett, Plaintiff, represented by Damien Berkes Troutman , Leigh Law Group & Jay T. Jambeck , Leigh Law Group.

Sacramento City Unified School District, Defendant, represented by Domenic D. Spinelli , Spinelli Donald & Nott.


STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY TIMELINES

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

STIPULATION

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, Plaintiffs, through their attorneys of record, and Defendant, through its attorneys of record, hereby request that the Court modify the current Scheduling Order and extend the discovery and expert disclosure deadlines as follows:

1. On February 2, 2016, the parties attended an initial scheduling conference. The Court's Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order was filed on February 12, 2016 as Docket Number 23.

2. On February 17, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint. The following dates were scheduled:

a. Discovery cut-off: March 31, 2017 b. Expert disclosure: April 2, 2017 c. Supplemental expert disclosure: May 2, 2017 d. Expert discovery cut-off: July 31, 2017 e. Joint mid-litigation proposal: August 31, 2017 f. Mid-litigation status conference: September 14, 2017 at 2:30 pm

3. On February 23, 2017, the parties stipulated to extend the above deadlines as follows:

a. Discovery cut-off be extended to May 31, 2017 b. Expert disclosure deadline be extended to July 28, 2017 c. Supplemental expert disclosure deadline be extended to August 31, 2017 d. Expert discovery cut-off be extended to September 22, 2017 e. Joint mid-litigation proposal deadline be extended to September 28, 2017 f. Mid-litigation status conference be continued to October 12, 2017 at 2:30 pm

4. On March 1, 2017, the Court entered an order approving the parties' stipulated dates.

5. Good cause exists to extend the dates set forth in the Court's March 1, 2017 Scheduling Order. The parties have worked diligently to complete discovery, including undertaking several rounds of written discovery. Additionally, Defendant noticed and completed the depositions of thirteen of the Plaintiffs/parent representatives. Due to calendar conflicts and other scheduling issues, those depositions occurred over a period of several months and concluded on May 19, 2017. Plaintiffs have noticed a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition to occur after the conclusion of the depositions of Plaintiffs but due to the complexity of the issues involved, along with the logistics of scheduling district employees responsive to the Rule 30(b)(6) categories at this time of year, additional time will be necessary for the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition to conclude within the present discovery schedule.

6. Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between all parties through their respective counsel of record that:

a. Discovery cut-off be extended solely for the purposes of completing the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition noticed by Plaintiffs on May 16, 2017. This deposition will be completed by July 28, 2017. b. Expert disclosure deadline be extended to September 15, 2017. c. Supplemental expert disclosure deadline be extended to October 13, 2017. d. Expert discovery cut-off be extended to November 30, 2017. e. Joint mid-litigation proposal deadline extended to December 7, 2017. f. Mid-litigation status conference extended to December 14, 2017 at 2:30 pm.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, and for good cause shown thereby, the request to continue the dates set forth in the March 1, 2017 scheduling order is GRANTED. It is hereby ORDERED that:

a. Discovery cut-off be extended solely for the purposes of completing the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition noticed by Plaintiffs on May 16, 2017. This deposition will be completed by July 28, 2017. b. Expert disclosure deadline be extended to August 15, 2017. c. Supplemental expert disclosure deadline be extended to September 15, 2017. d. Expert discovery cut-off be extended to October 10, 2017. e. Joint mid-litigation proposal deadline remain September 28, 2017. f. Mid-litigation status conference remain on October 12, 2017 at 2:30 pm in Courtroom 3.

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