Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05399/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05399-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RUSSELL H. FRYE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

THE WINE LIBRARY, INC., a

California Corporation; EDWARD

GELSMAN, an individual; and CARL

GELSMAN, an individual,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 06-5399 SC

ORDER GRANTING

DEFENDANTS' MOTION

FOR ORDER SHORTENING

TIME TO FILE AND HEAR

MOTION TO STRIKE

PLAINTIFF'S EXPERT

WITNESS DISCLOSURE

I. INTRODUCTION

This matter comes before the Court on the Motion for Order

Shortening Time to File and Hear Motion to Strike Plaintiff's

Expert Witness Disclosure ("Motion"), filed by the defendants The

Wine Library, Edward Gelsman and Carl Gelsman ("Defendants"). See

Docket No. 35. The plaintiff Russell Frye ("Plaintiff") filed a

Statement of Non-Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Order

Shortening Time to File and Hear Motion to Strike Plaintiff's

Expert Witness Disclosure ("Statement"). See Docket No. 48. For

the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion.

II. BACKGROUND

The current action is scheduled to begin trial on January 14,

2008. See Civil Minutes, Docket No. 26. The discovery cutoff was

November 2, 2007. Id. The last day to hear motions is December

Case 3:06-cv-05399-SC Document 51 Filed 11/27/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

7, 2007. Id. October 30, 2007, was the deadline for expert

disclosures, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. See

Mot. at 2. Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on

November 2, 2007. See Docket No. 28. Plaintiff allegedly then

attempted to serve a Rule 26 Expert Disclosure and Expert Report

on November 8, 2007. Mot. at 3. 

III. DISCUSSION

Defendants seek to have their Motion to Strike Plaintiff's

Expert Disclosure ("Motion to Strike") heard on December 7, 2007. 

Plaintiff does not oppose this. See Statement at 2. Therefore,

the Court will hear Defendants' Motion to Strike on December 7,

2007. At that time the Court will also address the previously

scheduled Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Defendants, and

Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint. See Docket Nos.

28, 29.

Defendants have submitted a copy of their Motion to Strike as

an attachment with their Motion for Order Shortening Time. 

Plaintiff shall file any Opposition to Defendants' Motion to

Strike no later than Friday, November 30, 2007, at 12:00 p.m. 

Defendants shall file any Reply no later than Tuesday, December 4,

2007, at 12:00 p.m.

///

///

///

///

///

Case 3:06-cv-05399-SC Document 51 Filed 11/27/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IV. CONCLUSION

For these reasons, Defendants' Motion for Order Shortening

Time to File and Hear Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Expert Witness

Disclosure is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 27, 2007 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05399-SC Document 51 Filed 11/27/07 Page 3 of 3