Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04045/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04045-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

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-

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING

DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES CASE NO. C 06-04045 JW (HRL)

RIMAC & MARTIN, P.C.

JOSEPH M. RIMAC - State Bar No. 72381

ANNA M. MARTIN - State Bar No. 154279

amartin@rimacmartin.com

1051 Divisadero Street 

San Francisco, California 94115

Telephone (415) 561-8440

Facsimile (415) 561-8430

Attorneys for Defendant

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 

OF AMERICA

ROBERT S. AARON (SBN 138903)

TIMOTHY C. WILSON (SBN 173928)

AARON & WILSON, LLP

150 Post Street, Suite 400

San Francisco, California 94108

Telephone: (415) 438-7800

Facsimile: (415) 438-7808

rsaaron@aaron-wilson.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JOSE GONZALES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

E-FILING

JOSE GONZALES, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF

AMERICA,

Defendant.

______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. C 06–04045 JW (HRL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER CONTINUING DISCOVERY

AND OTHER PRETRIAL DEADLINES

[L.R. 6-1 and 6-2; 7-12]

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, through their

respective attorneys of record, that the deadlines in the Court’s current Scheduling Order be

continued for ninety (90) days. 

Good cause exists for this continuation in that the parties have been diligently engaged in

settlement negotiations with the assistance of Martin Quinn at J.A.M.S. since January, 2006. The

Case 5:06-cv-04045-JW Document 20 Filed 06/25/07 Page 1 of 4
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-

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING

DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES CASE NO. C 06-04045 JW (HRL)

parties have conducted limited discovery over the past several months in an effort to place this

matter in a position to determine whether settlement is a possibility. The parties have been

trying to determine whether this matter can be settled without expending a great deal of attorney

time and expense. The parties had intended to conduct a second day of mediation in May, 2007,

however, Martin Quinn was out of the country and the parties were unable to schedule mediation

at an earlier time. As a result, the parties have now scheduled a second day of mediation before

Martin Quinn on June 29, 2007. Because the parties have been engaged in only limited

discovery up to this point in time to assist in a possible resolution of this matter, the parties

request that all deadlines be continued for 90 days. This will allow the parties time to try and

resolve this matter informally. If a settlement is not reached, then the parties will have sufficient

time to engage in necessary discovery, retention of expert witnesses etc. to prepare this matter for

trial. 

The current Scheduling Order sets the following dates:

06/29/07 L.D. to complete depositions

08/20/07 Last day to lodge with the court and serve on all

parties disclosure of expert witnesses

08/31/07 Last day for parties to disclose rebuttal expert

witnesses or motion to exclude the expert or any

portion of expert’s testimony

10/22/07 Close of all discovery

01/07/08 LD for hearing dispositive motions

02/29/08 Preliminary pretrial conference statements due

03/10/08 11:00 a.m., pre-trial conference

As stipulated above, the parties respectfully request the Court continue the foregoing

deadline dates by ninety (90) days so that the parties may have sufficient time to attempt to

resolve this matter utilizing private mediation as an alternative means of dispute resolution.

The parties propose the following new schedule, or to any dates thereafter, at the

convenience of the Court:

09/27/07 L.D. to complete depositions

Case 5:06-cv-04045-JW Document 20 Filed 06/25/07 Page 2 of 4
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-

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING

DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES CASE NO. C 06-04045 JW (HRL)

11/18/07 Last day to lodge with the court and serve on all

parties disclosure of expert witnesses

11/29/07 Last day for parties to disclose rebuttal expert

witnesses or motion to exclude the expert or any

portion of expert’s testimony

01/14/08 LD for hearing on expert and rebuttal expert disclosures

(Monday, law and motion day - 42 days after both expert and

rebuttal expert disclosures )

01/20/08 Close of all discovery

04/07/08 LD for hearing dispositive motions

05/30/08 Preliminary pretrial conference statements due

06/09/08 11:00 a.m., pre-trial conference

Pursuant to local rules, this document is being electronically filed through the Court’s

ECF System. In this regard, counsel for defendant hereby attests that (1) the content of this

document is acceptable to all persons required to sign the document; (2) plaintiff’s counsel has

concurred with the filing of this document; and (3) a record supporting this concurrence is

available for inspection or production if so ordered.

SO STIPULATED.

Executed this 21st day of June, 2007, at San Francisco, California.

AARON & WILSON, LLP

Dated: June 22, 2007 By: /S/ ROBERT S. AARON 

ROBERT S. AARON 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JOSE GONZALES

RIMAC & MARTIN

a Professional Corporation

DATED: June 22, 2007 By: /S/ ANNA M. MARTIN 

ANNA M. MARTIN

Attorneys for Defendant

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF

AMERICA

Case 5:06-cv-04045-JW Document 20 Filed 06/25/07 Page 3 of 4
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-

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING

DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES CASE NO. C 06-04045 JW (HRL)

ORDER

The parties having so stipulated, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Scheduling Order

dates be, and hereby are, each extended by ninety (90) days. The Court [adopts the parties’

proposed schedule and] shall issue a new Scheduling Order reflecting the new deadlines.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: ______________________ _________________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

June 25 2007

Case 5:06-cv-04045-JW Document 20 Filed 06/25/07 Page 4 of 4