Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-01807/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-01807-10/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

EXTENDING DISCOVERY DEADLINE TO 

COMPLETE SPECIFIC DEPOSITIONS 

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JERRY LUM, etc., et al., ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) 

 ) 

COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, et al., ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

 ) 

NO. 2:10-CV-01807-LKK-DAD 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

EXTENDING DISCOVERY 

DEADLINE TO COMPLETE 

SPECIFIC DEPOSITIONS 

[F.R.C.P. 16(b)(4)] 

[No hearing required] 

DANA A. SUNTAG (State Bar #125127)

JOSHUA J. STEVENS (State Bar # 238105) 

ZOEY P. MERRILL (State Bar #268331) 

THE SUNTAG LAW FIRM 

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 

The Kress Building 

20 North Sutter Street, Fourth Floor 

Stockton, California 95202 

Telephone: (209) 943-2004 

Facsimile: (209) 943-0905 

MATTHEW P. DACEY (State Bar #196943) 

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL OF SAN JOAQUIN 

Deputy County Counsel 

44 North San Joaquin Street, Suite 679 

Stockton, California 95202 

Telephone: (209) 468-2980 

Attorneys for All Defendants

Case 2:10-cv-01807-MCE-EFB Document 69 Filed 01/20/12 Page 1 of 4
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

EXTENDING DISCOVERY DEADLINE TO 

COMPLETE SPECIFIC DEPOSITIONS 

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

This stipulation and proposed order is entered into between Plaintiffs Jerry 

Lum and Dorothea Timmons (collectively “Plaintiffs”), on the one hand, and Defendants 

County of San Joaquin, City of Lathrop, Ray Walters, Steven Pease, Robert Davis, and 

Felipe Mendoza (collectively “Defendants”), on the other hand. 

RECITALS

A. On October 31, 2012, the Court granted a prior stipulation entered 

into between the parties extending the discovery cut-off date from December 31, 2012 

to January 31, 2012. 

B. Plaintiffs have conducted nine depositions. Plaintiffs have noticed 

the depositions of six of defendants’ expert witnesses, all of which are scheduled to be 

conducted between January 17 and January 27, 2012. 

C. Defendants have conducted eight depositions, including the 

depositions of two of plaintiffs’ four expert witnesses. In addition, Defendants have 

noticed the depositions of another seven percipient witnesses scheduled to be 

conducted by January 23, 2012. 

D. Plaintiffs timely disclosed Charles Saldanha, M.D. as their expert in 

the area of psychology/psychiatry. Dr. Saldanha’s deposition was initially scheduled to 

be conducted on January 6, 2012. On January 5, 2012, due to plaintiffs’ counsel’s 

unexpected illness, the parties were forced to cancel Dr. Saldanha’s deposition last 

minute. Due to the last-minute cancellation and Dr. Saldanha’s limited availability for 

the remainder of January, the parties are having great difficulties finding a mutuallyagreeable date, prior to the January 31, 2012 discovery cut-off, within which to depose 

Dr. Saldanha. 

E. Plaintiffs timely disclosed M. Patricia Fisher as their handwriting 

expert; however, due to a late-resolution of the parties’ disagreements regarding 

plaintiffs’ access to certain original documents within the possession, custody and 

control of the San Joaquin Sheriff’s Department, Ms. Fisher was unable, until the 

Case 2:10-cv-01807-MCE-EFB Document 69 Filed 01/20/12 Page 2 of 4
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

EXTENDING DISCOVERY DEADLINE TO 

COMPLETE SPECIFIC DEPOSITIONS 

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

afternoon of December 30, 2011, to access documents necessary to formulating her 

expert opinions in the case. Since then, in light of the parties’ already full deposition 

schedule in January, and Ms. Fisher’s limited availability, the parties are having 

difficulties finding a mutually agreeable date, prior to the January 31, 2012 discovery 

cut-off, within which to depose Ms. Fisher. 

F. Despite great effort, Defendants have had significant difficulty in 

locating and serving a deposition subpoena on Andrew Lum. Andrew Lum is the brother 

of decedent Jeremy Lum and was disclosed in plaintiffs’ initial disclosures as having 

information pertaining to events leading up to Jeremy Lum’s arrest. Defendants wish to 

depose Andrew Lum. 

G. The parties have agreed that, given the above delays, in light of 

the diligent efforts made by both sides to complete discovery, the discovery cut-off date 

for defendants to conduct the depositions of Charles Saldanha, M.D., M. Patricia Fisher, 

and Andrew Lum should be extended to February 29, 2012, to give defendants the 

necessary time to complete their discovery. 

H. This extension is only sought for purposes of completing these 

three specific depositions. The parties are not requesting that any other deadline be 

modified. 

Case 2:10-cv-01807-MCE-EFB Document 69 Filed 01/20/12 Page 3 of 4
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

EXTENDING DISCOVERY DEADLINE TO 

COMPLETE SPECIFIC DEPOSITIONS 

4

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

IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the parties, through their counsel 

of record, that the discovery cut-off be extended to February 29, 2012, only to allow 

defendants to conduct and complete the depositions of Charles Saldanha, M.D., M. 

Patricia Fisher, and Andrew Lum. 

Dated: January 13, 2012 THE SUNTAG LAW FIRM 

 A Professional Corporation 

 By: __/s/ Dana A. Suntag____________ 

 DANA A. SUNTAG 

Attorneys for All Defendants 

Dated: January 13, 2012 WALKER, HAMILTON & KOENIG LLP 

By: __/s/ Peter J. Koenig____________

PETER J. KOENIG 

Attorneys for All Plaintiffs 

O R D E R

The parties are free to stipulate among themselves concerning the timing 

of depositions. However, the court will not enforce any such agreements. The motion 

to extend the discovery deadline is DENIED. 

It is so ordered. 

Dated: January 20, 2012. 

Case 2:10-cv-01807-MCE-EFB Document 69 Filed 01/20/12 Page 4 of 4