Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00907/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00907-38/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 150
Nature of Suit: Overpayments &amp; Enforcement of Judgments
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute

---

1 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO FURTHER MODIFY 

FIRST AMENDED STATUS (PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER 

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

JAMES R. DONAHUE, SBN 105106

MICHAEL E. MYERS, SBN 99451 

DONAHUE · DAVIES LLP 

Post Office Box 277010 

Sacramento, CA 95827-7010 

Telephone: (916) 817-2900 

Facsimile: (916) 817-2644 

Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant 

AUTOMATED GAMING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

GILBERT J. PREMO 

Attorney at Law, State Bar No. 48503 

500 Northfield Lane 

Lincoln, CA 95648-8321 

Telephone: (415) 974-6664 

Facsimile: (415) 762-5350 

gilbertpremo@gmail.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff KEITH R. CLAYTON 

UNITED STATES DISCTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISCTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

-o0oKEITH R. CLAYTON 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

AUTOMATED GAMING TECHNOLOGIES, 

INC., a Nevada corporation, and DOES 1 

through 50, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

_______________________________________

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS 

_______________________________________

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2:13-cv-00907-JAM-EFB

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 

FURTHER MODIFY FIRST AMENDED 

STATUS (PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) 

ORDER; ORDER THEREON 

Plaintiff KEITH R. CLAYTON (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants AUTOMATED GAMING 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (“AGT”), JOHN B. PRATHER (“Prather”) and ROBERT MAGNANTI 

(“Magnanti”) (collectively “Defendants”) respectfully submit this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 

to Further Modify the 1st Amended Status (Pre-Trial Scheduling) Order (Docket No. 84), entered 

Case 2:13-cv-00907-JAM-EFB Document 214 Filed 09/14/15 Page 1 of 4
2 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO FURTHER MODIFY 

FIRST AMENDED STATUS (PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER 

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

herein on January 29, 2014, as modified by the court’s May 15, 2015 Order Amending the Status 

Order (Docket No. 202), only to extend the discovery cut-off for 21 days. In support of this 

Stipulation, the parties submit the following demonstrating good cause for the parties’ request, as 

required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b): 

 1. Since the time of entry of the court’s May, 2015 order establishing the current discovery 

cutoff date, Donahue Davies, LLP substituted into this case as counsel for AGT on June 30, 2015. 

Donahue Davies has thus been in this case for approximately 3 months and has been working to 

complete outstanding discovery and resolve the pending discovery disputes in this case. This case 

involves over 200,000 pages of document production and a number of complex issues, and it has 

taken substantial time for Defendants’ counsel to get up to speed on all relevant factual and 

discovery issues. This has delayed the progress of discovery activities along the previously 

established pre-trial schedule. 

 2. Plaintiff’s counsel has noticed the depositions of 5 of AGT’s employees for the last 

two weeks of September. However, Defendants’ counsel, James R. Donahue, is scheduled to 

commence trial on September 22, 2015, in the matter of Johnson v. Century 21 Real Estate, Case 

No. 34-2010-00092966, in Sacramento County Superior Court. This trial is expected to last 7-10 

days, and will effectively render Mr. Donahue unavailable for the final two weeks of discovery in 

this matter. Additionally, Donahue Davies is also commencing trial on September 21, 2015 in the 

matter of Keating v. Heryford, Case No. 10CV118, in Trinity County Superior Court. Further, these 

AGT employees are all located out of state, in Nevada and Kansas. AGT has agreed to produce these 

individuals in California for the mutual convenience of the parties in this case. However, arranging 

travel and working with the schedules of these individuals has resulted in a delay in the ability to 

move forward with the noticed depositions prior to the current discovery cutoff date. 

3. There are a number of pending discovery issues related to the production of financial 

information and records, Plaintiff has filed two motions to compel related his Fourth and Fifth 

Requests for Production of Documents. These motions are set to be heard on September 23, 2015. 

Plaintiff’s counsel anticipates taking the deposition of 5 AGT employees, and potentially deposing 3 

Case 2:13-cv-00907-JAM-EFB Document 214 Filed 09/14/15 Page 2 of 4
3 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO FURTHER MODIFY 

FIRST AMENDED STATUS (PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER 

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

ex-employees of AGT. Defendants’ counsel also intends to depose the Plaintiff. In addition to the 

discovery still pending, the parties intend to conduct further settlement negotiations, and are 

scheduling a mediation in the very near future to see if they can resolve this matter. 

4. For these reasons, the parties believe that a short 21 day continuance of the discovery 

cutoff date will allow for the completion of the outstanding discovery with no prejudice to the parties 

or delay in the case’s management and scheduling. In consideration of the foregoing, the parties 

stipulate and request that the 1st Amended Status (Pre-trial Scheduling) Order be modified to 

provide that the Discovery Cut-Off is October 23, 2015. 

DATED: September 14, 2015 DONAHUE · DAVIES LLP

 By: __/s/ Rebekah A. Morrissey__________________ 

 JAMES R. DONAHUE 

 REBEKAH A. MORRISSEY 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

DATED: September 14, 2015 

By: __/s/ Gilbert J. Premo______________________ 

GILBERT J. PREMO 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

 KEITH R. CLAYTON 

Case 2:13-cv-00907-JAM-EFB Document 214 Filed 09/14/15 Page 3 of 4
4 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO FURTHER MODIFY 

FIRST AMENDED STATUS (PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER 

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

ORDER 

 Based on the stipulation of the parties, and finding good cause therefor, IT IS HEREBY 

ORDERED that the 1st Amended Status (Pre-trial Scheduling) Order is hereby modified to provide 

that the Discovery Cut-Off shall be October 23, 2015. All other dates set forth in the Court’s Order 

of May 15, 2015 shall remain the same, to wit: 

Dispositive motion filing: November 4, 2015 

 Dispositive motion hearing: December 16, 2015 at 9:30 a.m., 

 Joint pretrial statement: January 22, 2016 

 Final Pretrial Conference: January 29, 2016 at 11:00 a.m., 

 Trial: March 7, 2016 at 9:00 a.m 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: September 14, 2015 

 

 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 

 JOHN A. MENDEZ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

Case 2:13-cv-00907-JAM-EFB Document 214 Filed 09/14/15 Page 4 of 4