Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_00-cv-01967/USCOURTS-caed-2_00-cv-01967-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1319 Pollutants &amp; Permit Violations

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

WATERKEEPERS NORTHERN

CALIFORNIA, a non-profit

corporation, doing business as

DELTAKEEPER, and BILL

JENNINGS, an individual;

NO. CIV. S 00-1967 MCE PAN

Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER

AG INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING,

INC., a corporation; and

CLAUDE E. BROWN, an

individual;

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

By letter to the Court dated September 21, 2005, counsel for

Plaintiffs in this matter has requested a ruling as to the

parties’ request for limited additional discovery in this matter. 

In January of 2005, the parties approved and submitted to the

Court for signature a revised Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order

(“PTSO”) in this matter given the fact that the original PTSO,

issued on January 5, 2005, had become outdated due to a

Case 2:00-cv-01967-MCE -PAN Document 173 Filed 10/04/05 Page 1 of 3
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

By letter to the Court dated September 22, 2005, 1

Plaintiffs’ counsel now objects to “completely reopening

discovery” in an “unlimited” fashion due to concerns about

expeditiously moving this case towards trial. As set forth

below, however, the additional discovery being permitted is not

unlimited. In addition, Plaintiffs’ September 22, 2005 letter

expresses no opposition to continuance of the trial in this

matter, so long as it is not scheduled past March of 2006. The

continuance granted below is within those parameters.

2

subsequent dismissal of the case for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction, and proceedings on appeal which ultimately resulted

in return of the matter to this Court for further handling in

early 2005. Given the reactivation of the matter before this

Court, and the fact that the original discovery deadline had

passed as of April 18, 2002, both parties requested that limited

additional discovery be permitted in order to bring the case up

to date.

Because the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment did

not result in a disposition of the entire case, with a jury trial

on calendar for December 7, 2005, the request for additional

discovery must now be addressed. Discovery will be permitted, 1

as of the date of this Order, for the limited purpose of

addressing matters that have transpired since April 18, 2002 with

respect to the following: 1) any ongoing discharge of

pollutants from Plaintiffs’ Lodi manufacturing facility; 2)

Plaintiffs’ compliance with required pollution control measures

at said facility; and 3) updated financial disclosures by

Plaintiffs. That limited discovery shall be completed not later

than December 16, 2005.

In accordance with the additional time being afforded for

discovery, the currently scheduled final pretrial conference, set

Case 2:00-cv-01967-MCE -PAN Document 173 Filed 10/04/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

for October 24, 2005, as well as the December 7, 2005 jury trial,

are hereby vacated. The final pretrial conference is rescheduled

to February 6, 2006 at 1:30 p.m. Trial in this matter, which

shall be before an eight-member jury, shall commence on March 22,

2006 at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 3, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:00-cv-01967-MCE -PAN Document 173 Filed 10/04/05 Page 3 of 3