Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-03809/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-03809-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

1

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2; [PROPOSED] ORDER

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

FLYNN RILEY BAILEY & PASEK LLP

David B. Tillotson (No. 148162)

dtillotson@flynnriley.com

Ravi D. Sahae (No. 276113)

rsahae@flynnriley.com

1010 B Street, Suite 200

San Rafael, CA 94901

Fax (415) 482-9939

(415) 461-1000

Richard Sax (SBN 80632) richard@rsaxlaw.com

LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD SAX

448 Sebastopol Avenue

Santa Rosa, CA 95401

Telephone: (707) 525-1824

Facsimile: (707) 525-8119

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

SCOTT EMERSON FELIX and 

PATRICIA LOVEHAL SHUEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT EMERSON FELIX and PATRICIA 

LOVEHAL SHUEY,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

KARIN L. ANDERSON; and DOES 1-10, 

inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:14-cv-03809-HSG

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND 

DISCOVERY DEADLINES 

PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Plaintiffs Scott Felix and Patricia Shuey (“Plaintiffs”) together with defendant Karin L. 

Anderson (“Defendant”), by and through their respective attorneys, do hereby agree and stipulate 

as follows:

WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit on August 21, 2014;

Case 4:14-cv-03809-HSG Document 81 Filed 12/29/15 Page 1 of 3
2

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2; [PROPOSED] ORDER

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

WHEREAS on February 9, 2015, this Court entered an order granting leave to serve 

summons upon Defendant by publication, finding that Plaintiffs “made exhaustive efforts to serve 

Defendant by other means” and that “the evidence suggests that Defendant is aware of the pending 

litigation against her and is evading service;”

WHEREAS on June 30, 2015, Defendant appeared in this case and filed her Answer to the 

complaint;

WHEREAS on July 24, 2015, Defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, 

which motion was granted with leave to amend by this Court’s order entered August 20, 2015;

WHEREAS on September 10, 2015, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint in this 

action;

WHEREAS on September 28, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Complaint, which motion was heard and denied on November 5, 2015;

WHEREAS on November 5, 2015, this Court issued a scheduling order which set the 

deadline for fact discovery as March 1, 2016, and the deadline for expert discovery as April 1, 

2016;

WHEREAS following the hearing on the motion to dismiss, Plaintiffs began and are in the 

process of substituting attorneys in this action, which process has contributed to the delay in initial 

disclosures in this action;

WHEREAS in the rule 26(f) conference on December 14, 2015, Plaintiffs and Defendant

agreed that given the short time frame, and the fact that no discovery had then been propounded, it 

was impracticable and unlikely that discovery would be completed by the February 1, 2016 and 

March 1, 2016 deadlines established by this Court’s November 9, 2015 scheduling order;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs and Defendant wish to preserve the July 25, 2016 trial date in this 

matter while also allowing for additional time for the completion of discovery;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED:

1. The deadline for the close of fact discovery shall be extended from February 1, 2016, 

to April 1, 2016;

Case 4:14-cv-03809-HSG Document 81 Filed 12/29/15 Page 2 of 3
3

JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2; [PROPOSED] ORDER

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. The deadline for the close of expert discovery shall be extended from March 1, 2016, 

to May 1, 2016;

3. All other deadlines in this Court’s November 9, 2015 Scheduling Order shall remain 

unchanged. 

DATED: December 28, 2015 FLYNN RILEY BAILEY & PASEK LLP

____/s/ Ravi D. Sahae________________

David B. Tillotson

Ravi D. Sahae

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DATED: December 28, 2015 SCHIFF HARDIN LLP

_____/s/ Jamie L. Lanphear____________

Jean L. Bertrand

Bruce Wagman

Jamie L. Lanphear

Attorneys for Defendant

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED:__________________ _________________________________________

JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

DENIED

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. 

12/29/2015

Case 4:14-cv-03809-HSG Document 81 Filed 12/29/15 Page 3 of 3