Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01200/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01200-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

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

1

The fact discovery cut-off date in this action is July 1, 2005, the expert discovery cut-off is August

1, 2005, the motion hearing cut-off is September 20, 2005, the pre-trial conference is set for November 1,

2005, and trial is set for November 7, 2005. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re:

CALPINE CORPORATION SECURITIES

LITIGATION

/

THIS DOCUMENT APPLIES TO ALL

CONSOLIDATED ACTIONS.

/

No. C 02-1200 SBA

Consolidated with Related Actions

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Lead Plaintiff’s Motion to Enlarge Deadlines. Lead Plaintiff

seeks to enlarge all pre-trial and trial deadlines by 120 days due to recent voluminous document

productions by Defendant.1

Lead Plaintiff asserts that since being compelled to produce documents on March 18, 2005,

Defendant has produced over 500,000 pages of documents, over 350,000 of which have been produced

on or after April 22, 2005. Plaintiff asserts that they must review the documents to both identify who must

be deposed and to prepare for already identified deponents. Defendant opposes the motion on the

grounds that Lead Plaintiff waited nearly two months after the start of discovery to propound discovery

requests and waited one month after receiving Defendant’s discovery responses before attempting to meet

and confer. In addition, Defendant asserts that it has identified, at Lead Plaintiff’s request, the documents

produced by each of the deponents whom Lead Plaintiff has named, therefore making it less cumbersome

for Lead Plaintiff to review those documents in preparation for the depositions.

After reviewing the arguments presented by the parties in their papers, the Court finds that a brief

Case 4:02-cv-01200-SBA Document 395 Filed 05/18/05 Page 1 of 2
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

Defendant asserts that additional, privileged documents may still need to be produced in redacted

form.

2

extension of certain pre-trial deadlines is warranted. Lead Plaintiff is partially responsible for its present

need for an extension of the discovery deadlines due to its two-month delay in commencing discovery and

one-month delay in seeking to meet and confer. However, Defendant’s failure to respond to relevant

discovery requests resulted in Defendant being compelled to produce hundreds of thousands of documents,

a task it did not complete until April 30, 2005.2

 In light of Defendant’s identification of the documents

produced by each deponent and the number of documents Lead Plaintiff has asserted it has left to review,

the Court is satisfied that if Lead Plaintiff acts diligently, the following extension will provide it with sufficient

time to complete all necessary discovery. 

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the July 2, 2004 Order for Pretrial Preparation is modified as

follows:

Fact Discovery Cut-off date: August 1, 2005

Expert Discovery Cut-off date: September 1, 2005

Dispositive Motion Hearing Cut-off date: October 18, 2005

 All other deadlines, including the pre-trial conference and trial dates, remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Saundra Brown Armstrong

Dated: 5/17/05 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:02-cv-01200-SBA Document 395 Filed 05/18/05 Page 2 of 2