Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00430/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00430-5/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION MODIFYING CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. 2:15-cv-00430-GEB-KJN

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

JOHN L. BURRIS, Esq./ State Bar #69888

BENJAMIN NISENBAUM, Esq./State Bar #222173

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS

Airport Corporate Centre

7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120

Oakland, California 94621

Telephone: (510) 839-5200 Facsimile: (510) 839-3882

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

JOHN M. LUEBBERKE, City Attorney

State Bar No. 164893

Ted Wood, Deputy City Attorney, SBN 191768

425 N. El Dorado Street, 2nd Floor

Stockton, CA 95202

Telephone: (209) 937-8333

Facsimile: (209) 937-8898

Attorneys for Defendants

CITY OF STOCKTON, and ERIC JONES, JOHN GRIFFIN,

JASON SHAFFER, THOMAS HESLIN, and JAMES MANOR,

municipal employees

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

R.T., a minor, by and through her guardian ad 

litem PENEUILA NUU, individually and as 

successor-in-interest to Decedent MATAUTU

NUU; PENEUILA NUU; MATAUAO NUU; 

KARISIMASI NUU; K.O., a minor, by and 

through her guardian ad litem, DANIEL OJEDA; 

Plaintiffs,

vs.

ERIC JONES, individually; JOHN GRIFFIN, 

individually; THOMAS HESLIN, individually; 

JAMES MANOR, individually, Stockton police 

officers DOES 1-25, inclusive,

Defendants.

 Case No. 2:15-cv-00430-GEB-KJN

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER 

MODIFYING CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

Case 2:15-cv-00430-TLN-DB Document 25 Filed 09/02/15 Page 1 of 3
STIPULATION MODIFYING CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. 2:15-cv-00430-GEB-KJN

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

STIPULATION

On August 20, 2015, this Court issued its Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order (Document 23) 

(hereinafter, “scheduling order”). Though the scheduling order sets a trial date consistent with the 

parties’ Joint Status Report filed on August 17, 2015 (Document 21) of October 18, 2016, the 

scheduling order requires initial expert witness disclosure requirements to be completed no later than 

November 16, 2015, which is approximately eleven months prior to the trial date, with rebuttal expert 

witness disclosures completed no later than December 16, 2015 (approximately ten months prior to 

the trial date). The court set all discovery cut off on March 16, 2016.

WHEREAS, the parties have only begun fact discovery as of the date the Court issued its 

scheduling order.

WHEREAS, the parties agree that conducting sufficient fact discovery for expert witnesses to 

render complete opinions based on all the evidence developed during fact discovery in the case is 

unfeasible to do by November 16, 2015. Any such expert opinions would be necessarily based on 

incomplete fact discovery, which would be prejudicial to each parties’ expert witness opinions. 

Rebuttal opinions are due to be completed one month later, though fact discovery is set to remain 

open until March 16, 2016. Under the scheduling order issued by the Court, the parties could not 

reasonably rely on their expert witness opinions, since they would necessarily be based on incomplete 

fact discovery.

WHEREFORE, the parties jointly stipulate and request the Court modify its case scheduling 

order (Document 23), to change the date of initial expert witness disclosure requirements to be 

completed by February 16, 2016, with rebuttal expert witness disclosure requirements one month 

later: March 16, 2016, with all discovery closing April 15, 2016. Since the last motion hearing date 

set by the Court’s scheduling order is May 16, 2016 at 9:00 a.m., the proposed modification should 

not impact the last motion hearing date or any subsequent date set in the scheduling order.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Case 2:15-cv-00430-TLN-DB Document 25 Filed 09/02/15 Page 2 of 3
STIPULATION MODIFYING CASE SCHEDULING ORDER

Case No. 2:15-cv-00430-GEB-KJN

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

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: August 31, 2015 THE LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS

/s/ Benjamin Nisenbaum

John L. Burris, Esq. 

Benjamin Nisenbaum, Esq. 

Attorney for Plaintiffs

R.T., et al. 

Dated: August 31, 2015

JOHN M. LUEBBERKE

CITY ATTORNEY

BY /s/ Ted Wood

Ted Wood

 DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY

Attorneys for Defendants

CITY OF STOCKTON, et al.

 (PROPOSED) ORDER

Good cause shown, the parties stipulation to modify the Court’s scheduling order is granted. 

The deadline for the parties to complete their initial expert witness disclosure requirements is 

modified to February 16, 2016. The deadline for the parties to complete their rebuttal expert witness 

disclosures is modified to April 16, 2016. The cutoff date for all discovery to be completed is 

modified to April 15, 2016. No other dates shall be affected by this modification.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2015

Case 2:15-cv-00430-TLN-DB Document 25 Filed 09/02/15 Page 3 of 3