Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00293/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00293-3/pdf.json

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

---

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT AND SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1

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

KELLER, SLOAN, ROMAN & HOLLAND LLP

Christopher T. Holland (SBN 164055) cholland@ksrh.com

Ethan Jacobs (SBN 291838) ejacobs@ksrh.com

555 Montgomery St., 17th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: 415.249.8330

Facsimile: 415.249.8333

MURRAY MURPHY MOUL + BASIL LLP

Geoffrey J. Moul (admitted pro hac vice) moul@mmmb.com

1114 Dublin Road

Columbus, OH 43215

Telephone: 614.610.9653

Facsimile: 614.488.0401

Attorney for Defendant 

THE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO COMPANY

GAW | POE LLP

Randolph Gaw (SBN 223718) rgaw@gawpoe.com

Mark Poe (SBN 223714) mpoe@gawpoe.com

Victor Meng (SBN 254102) vmeng@gawpoe.com

4 Embarcadero, Suite 1400

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: 415.766.7451

Facsimile: 415.737.0642 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

THEO DUNCAN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

THEO DUNCAN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

THE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO COMPANY,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 2:16-cv-00293-TLN-KJN

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO 

RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT 

AND SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Plaintiff Theo Duncan and Defendant The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company, by stipulation, 

agreed that Defendant be given an extension of time up to and including July 1, 2016 to move or 

plead in response to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint. Defendant has indicated its intention to file 

Case 2:16-cv-00293-TLN-KJN Document 22 Filed 06/24/16 Page 1 of 2
ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT AND SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

2

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

a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12. The parties have 

stipulated to a briefing schedule extending Plaintiff’s deadline for filing an opposition to the 

motion to dismiss and extending Defendant’s deadline for filing a reply to Plaintiff’s opposition. 

Upon consideration of the stipulation filed by the parties, Defendant’s deadline to 

respond to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is extended to July 1, 2016, Plaintiff’s deadline to file 

an opposition to the motion to dismiss is extended to August 1, 2016, and Defendant’s deadline 

to file a reply to Plaintiff’s opposition is extended to August 22, 2016. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 23, 2016

Case 2:16-cv-00293-TLN-KJN Document 22 Filed 06/24/16 Page 2 of 2