Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-05695/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-05695-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights 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

Stipulation to Extend Time Case No. C 03 05695 JW

& Proposed Order

M. Jean Starcevich (SBN 78298)

770 Lincoln Avenue

San Jose, CA. 95126

Telephone: 408- 287-7787

Facsimile: 408-287-8862

Attorney for Plaintiff Ginger Kiernan

Timothy T. Scott (SBN 126971)

Tracy J. Phillips (SB 209505)

SIDLEY AUSTIN BROWN & WOOD LLP

555 California Street, Suite 5000

San Francisco, California 94104-1715

Telephone: 415-772-1200

Facsimile: 415-397-4621

Victoria L. Donati (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP

Two North LaSalle Street

Suite 2200

Chicago, Illinois 60602

Telephone: 312-269-8473

Facsimile: 312-269-1747

Attorneys for Defendant Euromarket Designs, Inc.

d/b/a Crate & Barrel

United States District Court

Northern District of California, San Jose Division

GINGER KIERNAN, ) NO. C 03 05695 JW

)

Plaintiff, ) SECOND STIPULATION EXTENDING

) DEADLINES AS SET FORTH IN

EUROMARKET DESIGNS, INC. ) COURT’S SCHEDULING ORDER

d/b/a CRATE & BARREL, and ) OF AUGUST 12, 2004, AS AMENDED 

DOES 1 through 10, ) BY ORDER DATED JUNE 13, 2005,

) AND PROPOSED SECOND ORDER

Defendants. )

)

STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME

WHEREAS, by Stipulation dated June 7, 2005, and Order dated June 13, 2005,

the date for expert disclosures was October 11, 2005, with the date of disclosure of

rebuttal experts to be made by October 21, 2005, with any motions to exclude an expert

or any expert’s report to be set for hearing no later than November 21, 2005;

Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 10/27/2005 Page 1 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 36 Filed 10/24/2005 Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge James Ware

Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 11/01/05 Page 1 of 5
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

Stipulation to Extend Time Case No. C 03 05695 JW

& Proposed Order 2

WHEREAS, both plaintiff’s counsel and defense counsel have recently engaged

in deposition discovery which experts will need to complete their reports as required by

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure § 26(a)(2)(B), with more percipient witness depositions

to be completed before the end of the year,

The parties have met and conferred and again agreed, subject to the court’s

approval, to a short continuance of those deadlines and to the following adjusted schedule

in this matter and proposal for a new court scheduling order as follows:

A. Disclosure of Expert Witnesses

1. Any party wishing to present expert witness testimony with respect to a claim

or defense shall lodge with the Court and serve on all parties, the name, address,

qualifications, resume and a written report which complies with Fed.R.Civ.P.(a)(2)(B) on

or before November 15, 2005. 

2. Expert witness disclosure shall be made with respect to a person who is either

(a) specially retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony pursuant to

Fed.R.Evid. 702 or (b), a regular employee or agent or treating physician who may be

called to provide expert opinion testimony.

3. The parties are also required to lodge any supplemental reports to which any

expert will testify at trial in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B).

4. Any party objecting to the qualifications of proposed testimony of an expert

must file, serve and notice a motion to exclude the expert or any portion of the expert’s

testimony in writing in accordance with Civil Local Rule 7-2, for hearing no later than

January 9, 2006, at 9:00 a.m.

B. Rebuttal Expert Witnesses

5. If the testimony of the expert is intended solely to contradict or rebut opinion

testimony on the same subject matter identified by another party, the party proferring a

rebuttal expert shall make the disclosures required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B), no later

than November 29, 2005.

Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 10/27/2005 Page 2 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 36 Filed 10/24/2005 Page 2 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 11/01/05 Page 2 of 5
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

Stipulation to Extend Time Case No. C 03 05695 JW

& Proposed Order 3

C. Limitation on Testimony by Expert Witnesses

6. Unless the parties enter into a written stipulation otherwise, upon timely

objection, an expert witness shall be precluded from testifying about any actions or

opinions not disclosed prior to the expert’s deposition. This is to ensure that all factual

material upon which expert opinion may be based and all tests and reports are completed

prior to the expert deposition. Unless application is made prior to the close of expert

discovery, each party will be limited to calling only one expert witness in each discipline

involved in the case.

D. Close of Discovery

7. Pursuant to Civil L.R. 26-2, all discovery, including supplemental

disclosure, depositions of expert witnesses, must be completed by January 24, 2006.

E. Last date for Hearing Dispositive Motions

8. The last day for hearing dispositive motions is February 20, 2006, at 9:00

a.m. Any motions must be noticed in accordance with the Local Rules of this Court.

F. Preliminary Pretrial and Trial Setting Conference Statement and Proposed Order

9. The attorneys who will try to the case are ordered to confer with one

another and to file and lodge with Chambers on March 10, 2006, a Preliminary Pretrial

and Trial Setting Conference Statement and Proposed Order, stating their readiness for

trial, the amount of which in which the Court should allocate for trial and the calendar

period for the trial. Ordinarily, depending on the length of the trial the Court will set the

trial during a calendar period approximately three to four months after the Preliminary

and Trial Setting Conference. In the Statement discussed in this paragraph, the parties

should show any cause why the case should be advanced or delayed beyond this period.

10. The attorneys who will try to the case are ordered to appear on March 20,

2006, at 11:00 a.m. for a Preliminary Pretrial and Trial Setting Conference.

Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 10/27/2005 Page 3 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 36 Filed 10/24/2005 Page 3 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 11/01/05 Page 3 of 5
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

Stipulation to Extend Time Case No. C 03 05695 JW

& Proposed Order 4

11. With respect to the time allocation for trial, at the Preliminary Pretrial and

Trial Setting Conference trial counsel will be asked to stipulate to a time allocation to

each side for the trial of the case. Once a stipulated allocation has been entered, the

parties must plan their presentations to conform to the stipulated time allocation.

12. With respect to the calendar period for trial, based on the time allotted to the

case, a calendar period for trial will be set. In the event it becomes necessary to delay the

start of trial because of the Court’s calendar, the commencement date will trail from dayto-day until the other matter is concluded or further order of court.

SO STIPULATED:

DATED:

M. JEAN STARCEVICH, Attorney

for Plaintiff GINGER KIERNAN

NEAL, GERBER & EISENBERG LLP

DATED:

By: Victoria L. Donati

Timothy T. Scott

Tracy J. Phillips

Sidley Austin Brown & Wood

Attorneys for Defendant

EUROMARKET DESIGNS, INC.

d/b/a CRATE & BARREL

Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 10/27/2005 Page 4 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 36 Filed 10/24/2005 Page 4 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 11/01/05 Page 4 of 5
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

Stipulation to Extend Time Case No. C 03 05695 JW

& Proposed Order 5

 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER

Upon reading the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefore,

the court hereby adopts the amended schedule as proposed by the parties and issues an

Amended Scheduling Order in accordance with the time deadlines as set forth in that

stipulation.

DATED:

HONORABLE JAMES WARE,

JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES

DISTRICT COURT 

Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 36 Filed 10/24/2005 Page 5 of 5

10/27/05

Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 10/27/2005 Page 5 of 5 Case 5:03-cv-05695-JW Document 37 Filed 11/01/05 Page 5 of 5