Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00559/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00559-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

 

LAWRENCE P. RIFF (CA BAR NO. 104826) 

JAY E. SMITH (CA BAR NO. 162832) 

STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP 

633 West Fifth Street, Seventh Floor 

Los Angeles, California 90071 

Telephone: (213) 439-9400 

Facsimile: (213) 439-9599 

lriff@steptoe.com

jsmith@steptoe.com

 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 

[ADDITIONAL PARTIES AND COUNSEL 

SHOWN ON SIGNATURE PAGE] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern 

California Edison Company, California Electricity 

Oversight Board, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

Arizona Electric Power Cooperative; City of 

Anaheim; City of Azusa; City of Banning; City of 

Burbank; City of Glendale; City of Pasadena; City 

of Riverside; City of Santa Clara; City of Seattle; 

City of Vernon; Eugene Water and Electric Board; 

City of Los Angeles; Modesto Irrigation District; 

Northern California Power Agency; Public Utility 

District No. 2 of Grant County; Sacramento 

Municipal Utility District; Salt River Project 

Agricultural Improvement and Power District; 

Turlock Irrigation District, 

Defendants. 

No.: 2:06-cv-0559-MCE-KJM 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 

MODIFY BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE 

MOTION OF DEFENDANT PUBLIC 

UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2 OF GRANT 

COUNTY, WASHINGTON TO 

DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL 

JURISDICTION 

Case 2:06-cv-00559-MCE -KJM Document 230 Filed 08/07/06 Page 1 of 6
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 

San Diego Gas & Electric Company, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Arizona Electric Power Cooperative; City of 

Anaheim; City of Azusa; City of Banning; City of 

Burbank; City of Glendale; City of Pasadena; City 

of Riverside; City of Santa Clara; City of Seattle; 

City of Vernon; Eugene Water and Electric Board; 

City of Los Angeles; Modesto Irrigation District; 

Northern California Power Agency; Public Utility 

District No. 2 of Grant County; Sacramento 

Municipal Utility District; Salt River Project 

Agricultural Improvement and Power District; and 

Turlock Irrigation District, 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 2:06-CV-00592-MCE-KJM 

Case 2:06-cv-00559-MCE -KJM Document 230 Filed 08/07/06 Page 2 of 6
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 

Plaintiffs and Defendant Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Washington 

(“Grant”), by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and request the Court to 

enter an Order, as set forth below, to modify the deadlines for filing and service of the 

opposition and reply briefs regarding Grant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal 

Jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2). This Stipulation is based 

on the following facts: 

1. On April 11, 2006, the parties filed a Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 

setting a proposed schedule for the briefing and hearing of certain 

preliminary motions in this matter, including motions challenging 

personal jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

12(b)(2) (“Rule 12(b)(2)”). 

2. On April 12, 2006, the Court entered an Order pursuant to the 

stipulation of all parties, which established the following filing 

deadlines for Rule 12(b)(2) Motions: May 5, 2006 for Opening Briefs; 

June 16, 2006 for Opposition Brief(s); and July 7, 2006 for Reply 

Briefs. The Order applies in related case numbers 2:06:CV-00559-

MCE-KJM and 2:06:CV-00592-MCE-KJM. 

3. On May 5, 2006, Grant filed its Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 

12(b)(2). 

4. Pursuant to the agreement of Plaintiffs and Grant, and a May 25, 2006 

Order issued by Magistrate Judge Mueller, Plaintiffs have propounded 

discovery upon Grant by which Plaintiffs seek to develop evidence 

relevant to the question of whether this Court has personal jurisdiction 

over Grant. 

5. Grant has also agreed to respond to Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories and 

Requests for Admissions, and the parties anticipate that at least one 

witness affiliated with Grant County will be deposed after the 

production of documents and service of responses to the aboveCase 2:06-cv-00559-MCE -KJM Document 230 Filed 08/07/06 Page 3 of 6
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

4 

referenced written discovery. 

6. On June 16, 2006, plaintiffs filed a “Notice of Pending Stipulated 

Modification of Briefing Schedule Re Motion of Defendant Public 

Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Washington to Dismiss for Lack 

of Personal Jurisdiction.” That notice was intended to advise the Court 

that the present stipulation was in the process of being negotiated. 

7. On June 28, 2006, the Court entered its Order Amending Briefing 

Schedule and Rescheduling Hearing (docket no. 195). This Order, 

based on the parties’ stipulation, moved the hearing date on Grant’s 

Rule 12(b)(2) motion to October 24, 2006 but noted (see p. 4, l. 27 to 

p. 5, l. 2) that the briefing schedule for the Rule 12(b)(2) motion would 

be addressed by way of this separate stipulation. 

8. In order to permit the parties to complete their jurisdictional discovery 

in an orderly manner, and subsequently complete the briefing on 

Grant’s Rule 12(b)(2) motion, they hereby stipulate and request that the 

Court order that the Court’s Order of April 12, 2006 be modified such 

that Plaintiffs’ Opposition Brief(s) in the related cases shall be due on 

August 18, 2006 and Grant’s Reply Brief shall be due on October 3, 

2006. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED: 

 JONES DAY 

Dated: June 28, 2006 /s/ Peter G. McAllen (as authorized on June 28, 2006)

 Peter G. McAllen 

 Erin L. Burke 

Attorneys for Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant 

County, Washington 

Case 2:06-cv-00559-MCE -KJM Document 230 Filed 08/07/06 Page 4 of 6
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

5 

 HELLER EHRMAN LLP 

Dated: June 28, 2006 /s/ Russell Cohen (as authorized on June 28, 2006) 

 Marie L. Fiala 

 Russell Cohen 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 

 STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP 

Dated: June 28, 2006 /s/ Jay E. Smith 

 Lawrence P. Riff 

 Jay E. Smith 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff Southern California Edison Co. 

 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY OVERSIGHT BOARD 

Dated: June 28, 2006 /s/ Steven Russo (as authorized on June 28, 2006) 

 Steven Russo 

Attorney for Plaintiff California Electricity Oversight 

Board 

 

HENNIGAN, BENNET & DORMAN LLP 

Dated: June 28, 2006 /s/ Laura Lindgren (as authorized on June 28, 2006) 

 Laura Lindgren 

Attorneys for Plaintiff San Diego Gas & Electric 

Company 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:06-cv-00559-MCE -KJM Document 230 Filed 08/07/06 Page 5 of 6
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

6 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the briefing deadlines under the Court’s April 12, 

2006 Order are extended as follows: Plaintiffs’ Opposition Brief(s) in response to Grant’s 

Rule 12(b)(2) Motion shall be due on August 18, 2006, and Grant’s Reply Brief shall be due 

on October 3, 2006. 

DATED: August 7, 2006 

__________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:06-cv-00559-MCE -KJM Document 230 Filed 08/07/06 Page 6 of 6