Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00583/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00583-32/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRU-CON CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION,

Plaintiff, CIV. NO. S-05-0583 LKK GGH

vs.

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL ORDER

UTILITY DISTRICT, et al,

Defendants. 

 /

The court is in receipt of the parties letter, filed August 22, 2006, in which the

parties request that the court revise its order, filed August 22, 2006, to conform to the proposed

stipulation and order submitted by the parties on August 16, 2006, insofar as it proposed that the

parties “will endeavor to complete all expert depositions on or before December 22, 2006,” and

did not propose to change the discovery cutoff of January 18, 2007. The order as filed, requiring

the parties to complete all expert depositions by December 22, 2006, will not be amended. The

proposed stipulation permitted the parties to agree to an unenforceable deadline. The proposal

also allowed for the possibility of disputes to arise on the eve of the discovery cutoff. For these

reasons, the parties’ request is denied. If extraordinary circumstances exist, and they must be

extraordinary circumstances, the parties may request an extension of time on a case by case basis.

Case 2:05-cv-00583-LKK -GGH Document 256 Filed 08/29/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ request for modification of the

order, filed August 22, 2006, is denied.

DATED: 8/28/06 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

 U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:076

Fru-Con0583.stp.wpd

Case 2:05-cv-00583-LKK -GGH Document 256 Filed 08/29/06 Page 2 of 2