Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02196/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02196-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 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

1

Stipulation for Order Extending Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff

(2:12-CV-2196 MCE DAD)

KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672

Attorney General of California

ALBERTO L. GONZÁLEZ, State Bar No. 117605

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

NELI N. PALMA, State Bar No. 203374

Deputy Attorney General

1300 I Street, Suite 125

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 445-2482

Fax: (916) 322-8288

E-mail: Neli.Palma@doj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Defendants California Highway Patrol Officer Andrew Murrill and California 

Highway Patrol Officer J. Sherman California Highway Patrol Sergeant Kevin Pierce; 

California Highway Patrol Lieutenant John Arrabit; California Patrol Assistant Chief 

Kenneth Hill; and California Highway Patrol Commander Chief Stephen Lerwill

GALLO LLP

RAY E. GALLO, State Bar #158903

DOMINIC R. VALERIAN, State Bar #240001

1299 Fourth Street, Suite 505

San Rafael, CA 94901

Telephone: (415) 257-8800

Fax: (415) 257-8844

E-mail: rgallo@gallo-law.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs

LAW OFFICE OF DAVID W. 

WIECHERT

DAVID W. WIECHERT, State Bar #94607

Jessica C. Munk, State Bar #238832 

115 Avenida Miramar

San Clemente, CA 92672

Telephone: (949) 496-6753

Fax: (959) 496-6753

E-mail: dwiechert@aol.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OLEGS KOZACENKO,

Plaintiff,

v.

California Highway Patrol Officer 

ANDREW P. MURRILL (Badge #19671); 

California Highway Patrol Officer J. 

SHERMAN (Badge #11614); California 

Highway Patrol Sergeant KEVIN PIERCE; 

California Highway Patrol Lieutenant 

JOHN ARRABIT; California Patrol 

Assistant Chief KENNETH HILL; and 

California Highway Patrol Commander 

Chief STEPHEN LERWILL,

Defendants.

2:12-CV-2196 MCE DAD

STIPULATION FOR ORDER 

EXTENDING NON-EXPERT 

DISCOVERY CUTOFF BY THIRTY 

DAYS; AND ORDER 

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 75 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 3
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 for Order Extending Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff

(2:12-CV-2196 MCE DAD)

COME NOW THE PARTIES by and through their respective attorneys and subject to the 

approval of this Court, hereby stipulate and respectfully request that the Court extend the nondiscovery cut-off by thirty (30) days for good cause: 

• Non-expert discovery cut-off is currently set for April 8, 2015. Doc. 62, at 2:1-3. 

• Non-expert discovery cut-off be moved to May 8, 2015 

I. ARGUMENT

A. LEGAL STANDARD.

“A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent.” Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 16(b). A formal motion is not necessary. Adv. Comm. Notes to 1983 Amendment to Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 16(b). Good cause requires a showing of due diligence. Johnson v. Mammoth 

Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). A lesser showing of good cause is sufficient 

to modify the initial scheduling order entered early in the action than the showing required for a 

final pretrial conference order. Notes of Advisory Committee on Rule 16, 97 F.R.D. 165, 208. 

B. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND THE NONEXPERT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF BY THIRTY DAYS 

There is pending in this court two discovery matters, plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant 

Murill to respond to deposition questions (Doc. 65) and defendants’ motion to compel physical 

and mental examination (Doc. 64). Plaintiff is now represented by new counsel, who only 

recently appeared. Docs. 67, 68, 70, 71. The parties have reinitiated meet and confer efforts in 

attempts to resolve much if not all of the issues presented in the discovery motions. The parties 

have sought an order from the Magistrate Judge, by stipulation, to continue the hearing on the 

discovery motions to afford the parties additional time to do so. To allow new counsel and 

defendants’ counsel to then proceed in accordance with the parties’ resolution or the Court’s 

resolution of the discovery motions, the parties request the thirty day extension of the non-expert 

discovery cut-off. This will also serve to allow new counsel to review their file to complete their 

discovery plan and allow defendants to do the same.

/ / /

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 75 Filed 02/13/15 Page 2 of 3
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 for Order Extending Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff

(2:12-CV-2196 MCE DAD)

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: February 5, 2015 KAMALA D. HARRIS

Attorney General of California

ALBERTO L. GONZÁLEZ

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

/s/ Neli Palma

NELI PALMA

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendants California Highway Patrol 

Officer Andrew Murrill; California Highway Patrol 

Officer J. Sherman; California Highway Patrol 

Sergeant Kevin Pierce; California Highway Patrol 

Lieutenant John Arrabit; California Patrol Assistant 

Chief Kenneth Hill; and California Highway Patrol 

Commander Chief Stephen Lerwill

Dated: February 5, 2015

GALLO LLP

By: /s/ David W. Wiechert for

 RAY E. GALLO

 Attorney for Plaintiffs

Dated: February 5, 2015

LAW OFFICES OF DAVID W. WIECHERT

By: /s/ David W. Wiechert

 DAVID W. WIECHERT

 Attorney for Plaintiffs

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 11, 2015

Case 2:12-cv-02196-MCE-DAD Document 75 Filed 02/13/15 Page 3 of 3