Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01587/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01587-1/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER 

 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

 LAW OFFICE OF STEWART KATZ 

 STEWART KATZ, State Bar #127425 

 555 University Avenue, Suite 270 

 Sacramento, California 95825 

 Telephone: (916) 444-5678 

 Facsimile: (916) 444-3364 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

 

GARY SANCHEZ 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

EL DORADO COUNTY, EL DORADO 

COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, 

DEPUTY RAVI FRY, SHERIFF JEFF 

NEVES, and DOES I through XXX, 

Inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

_________________________________/ 

NO. CIV. S-06-01587 WBS EFB 

 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

MODIFYING PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING ORDER

 

 COME NOW THE PARTIES by and through their respective parties and subject to 

the approval of this Court, hereby stipulate and respectfully request the following 

modifications and/or amendments to this Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Order; 

• That the deadline for Disclosure of Expert Witnesses, as set forth by the 

Court, be moved from June 22, 2007 to July 22, 2007, with the designation of any 

supplemental expert witnesses to, as set forth by the Court, to be within 20 days thereafter. 

The parties contend there is good cause for this request. The parties have been 

diligently conducting discovery in this matter. However, delays in locating certain 

Case 2:06-cv-01587-WBS-EFB Document 13 Filed 07/05/07 Page 1 of 2
 STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER 

 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

documents, witness scheduling difficulties and unanticipated time demands of other pending 

litigation including jury trials have led to the need for additional time to complete he 

discovery necessary for the expert disclosure reports. 

The parties do not anticipate the need for any further modification of the scheduling 

order. This proposed modification does not impact nor require any changes as to the 

discovery cut-off date, the timetable for motions or the date set for trial. 

Dated: June 11, 2007 BARKETT & GUMPERT 

 By: /s/ Franklin G. Gumpert

 FRANKLIN G. GUMPERT 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

Dated: June 11, 2007 LAW OFFICE OF STEWART KATZ 

 By: /s/ Stewart Katz

 STEWART KATZ 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 5, 2007. ________________________________ 

 Edmund F. Brennan 

 U.S. Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-cv-01587-WBS-EFB Document 13 Filed 07/05/07 Page 2 of 2