Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00998/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00998-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

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

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

 Christopher Cool,

Plaintiff

v.

City of Show Low, an Arizona Municipal

Corporation; James and Jane Doe Griffith,

husband and wife; and Ray and Jane Doe

Ballasteros, husband and wife,

Defendants. _________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-05-998-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Stipulated Motion to Extend the Witness Disclosure and

Discovery Deadlines set forth in the September 12, 2006 Rule 16 Scheduling Order (Doc. 44)

filed by Plaintiff Christopher Cool and Defendant City of Show Low. For good cause shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff's and Defendants' Stipulated

Motion to Extend the Witness Disclosure and Discovery Deadlines.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for Plaintiff to identify any person who

may be used at trial to present evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 701, 702, 703, 704

or 705 is extended to July 13, 2007; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's deadline to identify any person who

may be used at trial to present evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 701, 702, 703, 704

or 705 is extended to September 7, 2007; 

Case 2:05-cv-00998-SMM Document 45 Filed 05/24/07 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

27

28

- 2 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for both parties to identify rebuttal

experts is extended from to October 12, 2007; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for completion of all discovery,

including depositions of parties, witnesses and experts, answers to interrogatories and

supplements to interrogatories in extended to November 2, 2007.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that except with respect to the deadlines set forth herein,

all of the provisions in the Court's September 12, 2006 Rule 16 Scheduling Order remains

binding and valid on the parties.

DATED this 23rd day of May, 2007.

Case 2:05-cv-00998-SMM Document 45 Filed 05/24/07 Page 2 of 2