Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01349/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01349-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1330 Breach of Contract

---

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 

Benjamin K. Mason (State Bar No. 289066) 

Daniel J. Ban (State Bar No. 172521) 

MORLEY MASON, PLC 

2600 W. Geronimo Pl., Ste. 100 

Chandler, AZ 85224 

Telephone: 480.320.1254 

Facsimile: 480.505.0926 

bmason@morleymason.com 

dban@morleymason.com 

doc1m1ents@morleymason.com 

orders@morleymason.com 

Attorneys for Amazing Insurance, Inc. 

and Third-Party Defendants 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

IA 

AMAZING INSURANCE, INC, a Georgia 

corporation, 

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, 

v. 

MICHAEL A. DiMANNO, an individual, 

and ACCUIRE, LLC, a Florida limited 

liability company, 

Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs. 

MICHAEL A. DiMANNO, an individual, 

and ACCUIRE, LLC, a Florida limited 

liability company, 

Counterclaim Plaintiffs, 

v. 

VIK.ASH JA

IN, an individual, GERALD 

DOUGLAS ANDERTON, an individual, 

KARA CHILDRESS, an individual, and 

ALEX CAMPOS, an individual, 

Third-Party Defendants. 

Case No. 2:19-cv-01349-TLN-CKD 

CONSENT MOTION TO MODIFY 

DISCOVERY DEADLINES: 

ORDER

-}-

CONSENT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES; ORDER 

Case 2:19-cv-01349-DAD-CKD Document 106 Filed 05/11/22 Page 1 of 6
1 Plaintiff Amazing Insurance, Inc. and Third-Party Defendants (collectively, in this 

2 document, "Plaintiff'') file the following Consent Motion to Modify Discovery Deadlines: 

3 INTR0DIJCTl0N 

4 The parties' efforts to complete discovery in this case have become much more fruitful over 

5 the last several weeks and months, but unfortunately require short extension of the cmTent deadlines 

6 in order to be completed. Defendants consent tothe relief sought herein. 

7 PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 

8 The Court entered an Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order on July 18, 2019 (the "Pretrial 

9 Order"). ECF No. 3. The Pretrial Order set a number of discovery deadlines, keyed off trial dates 

10 and Answer dates. Id, On January 31, 2020, the parties filed a Joint Status Report providing for 

11 different discovery deadlines. ECF No. 33. The Court did not adopt or agree to these deadlines; 

12 therefore, the governing deadlines were those from the Pretrial Order. The Court then issued ECF 

13 No. 43 which set new discovery deadlines in this matter. On December 30, 2020, in response to a 

14 Joint Motion to Extend Time to Complete Discovery, !he Court issued ECF No. 78, which set new 

15 discovery deadlines in this matter. On March 1, 2021, the parties consented to a further extension 

16 of discovery deadlines, aft

er wlrich the Comt then issued ECF No. 81. On March 31, 2021, the 

17 court issuedECF No. 83 which set new discovery deadlines in tlris matter. On May 10, 2021, the 

18 court issued ECF No. 85 which set new discovery deadlines in this matter. On June 25, 2021, the 

19 pruties .consented to a further extension of discovery deadlines, after which the Court issued ECF 

20 No. 89, which setnew discovery deadlines in this matter. On August 26, 2021, the parties consented 

21 to a further extension of discovery deadlines, after which the Court issues ECF No. 93, which set 

22 new discovery deadlines in this matter. On November 2, 2021, the parties consented to a ftuther 

23 extension .of discovery deadlines, after which the Court issued ECF No. 95, which set new 

24 discovery deadlines in this matter. On December 6, 2021, the paities consented to a further 

25 extension of discovery deadlines, after which the Court issued ECF No. 99, which set new 

26 discovery deadlines in this matter. On March 15, 2022, the parties consented to a further extension 

27 of discovery deadlines, after which the Court issued ECF No. 103, which set new discovery 

28 deadlines in this matter. 

-2-

CONSENT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES; ORDER

Case 2:19-cv-01349-DAD-CKD Document 106 Filed 05/11/22 Page 2 of 6
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

STANDARD OF LAW 

This Court has broad discretion to amend to govern the pretrial phase of litigation before it, 

"The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation, and its 

decisions regarding the preclusive effect of a pretrial order ... will not be disturbed unless they 

evidence a clear abuse of discretion." Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 

(9th Cir. 1992) (citing Miller v. Safeco Title Ins. Co.,758 F.2d 364, 369 (9th Cir. 1985)). As stated 

by the Court itself, and by case law, the Court can modify its pretrial order on a showing of good 

cause, "A pretrial order controls the subsequent course of the action unless modified 'upon a 

showing of good cause."' Amerisourcebergen Corp. v. Dialysist West, Inc., 445 F.3d 1132, 1135 n. 

1 (9th Cir. 2006) (citing ElHakem v. BJY Inc.,415 F.3d 1068, 1077 (9th Cir.2005); Zivkovic v. S. 

Cal. Edison Co.,302 F.3d 1080, I 087 (9th Cir. 2002)), petition for cert. filed, 74 U.S.L.W. 3407 

(U.S. Oct. 19, 2005) (No. 05-84); see also Arsement v. Spinnaker Exploration Co.,400 F.3d 238, 

245 (5th Cir.2005) ("It goes without saying that a pre-trial order controls the scope and course of 

tna . 1 ..... ") 

ARGUMENT 

The paiiies have exchanged discovery responses, and further supplemental responses ai·e 

expected. Many of the expected nine ( or more) contemplated depositions have been completed, and 

the paiiies are actively communicating through counsel and working to accommodate the taking of 

said depositions. However, a Motion to .Consolidate this case with Case no 2: 18-cv-02066-TLNCKD has been filed and set for hearing on 6/16/2022, the outcome of which would modify further 

the discovery deadlines and responsibilities in this case. 

Based on this, Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendants, and Defendants, each through counsel, 

have agreed that the paiiies would request an extension of deadlines. Plaintiff therefore respectfully 

asks the Court to modify the discovery deadlines as follows: 

Deadline ECF No. 103 New Deadline 

Reauested bv Parties 

Discovery May 15, 2022 August 13, 2022 

-3-

CONSENT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES ;

Case 2:19-cv-01349-DAD-CKD Document 106 Filed 05/11/22 Page 3 of 6
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 

Initial Expert Disclosures July 15, 2022 October 13, 2022 

Supplemental Expert August 14, 2022 November 12, 2022 

Disclosures 

Dispositive Motions September 29, 2022 December 28, 2022 

CONCLUSION 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Court grant the relief detailed above, as to which all 

parties consent. 

DATED this 10th day of May, 2022. 

. Mason 

��_.,..,..SON, PLC 

Attorneys for Amazing Insurance, Inc. and 

All Third-Party Defendants 

-4-

CONSENT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES; ORDER 

--------------------·-----···· 

Case 2:19-cv-01349-DAD-CKD Document 106 Filed 05/11/22 Page 4 of 6
1 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL 

2 I certify that, on May 10, 2022, I communicated with John Shoreman, counsel for

3 Defendants, wherein Mr. Shoreman represented to me that Defendants do not oppose the relief

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

-5-

CONSENT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES; ORDER

Case 2:19-cv-01349-DAD-CKD Document 106 Filed 05/11/22 Page 5 of 6
1 CERTIFICATE OFSERVICE 

2 I hereby certify that on May 10, 2022, I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing via

3 ECF filing email on all counsel of record. 

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 

-6-

CONSENT MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY DEADLINES; ORDER 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 11, 2022

Troy L. Nunley

United States District Judge

Case 2:19-cv-01349-DAD-CKD Document 106 Filed 05/11/22 Page 6 of 6