Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01971/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01971-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:206 Collect Unpaid Wages

---

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

Cynthia L. Rice (SBN 87630)

CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE, INC.

631 Howard Street, Suite 300

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: (415) 777-2752

Facsimile: (415) 543-2752

Blanca Bañuelos (SBN 231585)

Esmeralda Zendejas (SBN 258809)

CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE, INC.

145 E. Weber Avenue

Stockton, CA 95202

Telephone: (209) 946-0605

Facsimile: (209) 946-5730

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Sergio Aguirre Batista, Hugo Santiago Arredondo Huerta, Daniel Becerra

Aguilar, Israel Blas Jimenez, Librado Blas Martinez, Ramiro Alejandro Garcia Castro, Enrique

Garcia Michel, Jaime Lopez Ramos, Fray Marcelino Lopez Rodriguez, Luis Ramon Naranjo

Campos, Angel Pano Ruiz, Frisdman Peña Ochoa, Aldo Manuel Rodriguez Zepeda, Octavio

Revolledo Godinez, Agustin Torres Elias, Tomas Ayala Gonzalez, Marco Cesar Garcia

Gutierrez, Jose Luis Rodriquez, Armando Zuniga Arias, Joel Murillo Guerrero, Oscar Manuel

Carillo Torres, Christian Ceja Ruiz, Christian Cruz Valverde, Demetrio Montes Gaitan, Gibran

Rigoberto Diaz Campo, Leonel Esparza Ramirez, Benigno Martinez Marquez, Rene Meza

Sanchez, Jesus Junior Robles Rodriquez, Luis Manuel Torres Contreras, Uriel Torres Contreras,

Juan Alfonso Bailon Marquez, Hugo Cesar Ceja Ibarra, Rigoberto Sandoval Preciado, Roberto

Cruz Barragan, Obed Mares Contreras

Julia L. Montgomery (SBN 184083) Mark Talamantes (SBN 187961)

CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL TALAMANTES/VILLEGAS/CARRERA, LLP

ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION 170 Columbus Avenue, Suite 300

2210 K Street, Suite 201 San Francisco, CA 94133

Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (415) 989-8000

Telephone: (916) 446-7901 Facsimile: (415) 989-8028

Facsimile: (916) 446-3057

Attorneys for all Plaintiffs Attorneys for all Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRAY MARCELINO LOPEZ RODRIGUEZ,

et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SGLC INC., et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 2:08-CV-01971-MCE-KJM

APPLICATION AND ORDER

SHORTENING TIME FOR SERVICE OF

MOTION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS

AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF

THE APPLICATION; ORDER

(Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(c))

Plaintiffs desire to file a motion granting leave to conduct in excess of ten (10)

APPLICATION AND ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR SERVICE OF MOTION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN

SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION; ORDER 1

Case 2:08-cv-01971-MCE-KJN Document 135 Filed 11/14/11 Page 1 of 4
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

depositions and to modify the amended pretrial scheduling order to extend the discovery cutoff as

it relates to two additional depositions that have been delayed to accommodate Defendants or

their counsel, and to depose a witness whose importance was not made known to Plaintiffs until

October 18, 2011. A copy of the proposed motion is attached to this application for an Order

Shortening Time. 

Plaintiffs desire that the motion be heard on November 17, 2011, in order that it may be

heard before the deadline for discovery cut-off set by the Court’s Amended Pretrial Scheduling

Order on November 23, 2011. 

It is impossible to give the full amount of written notice required by Local Rule 230(b)

for this motion to be heard on November 17, 2011. As explained in the attached Affidavit of

Esmeralda Zendejas, Plaintiff was unaware of the need to bring this motion at an earlier time. 

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES 

IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION

Although specific requirements for the time of service of court papers are set forth under

Local Rule 230, Local Rule 144(e) permits the court to prescribe a shorter time period. 

Under Rule 144(e), the application to shorten time shall set forth, by affidavit of counsel,

the circumstances to justify the issuance of an order shortening time. For “good cause” shown, a

court on request may order that the time be shortened for notice of a motion. Fed. R. Civ. Proc.

6(c)(1)(C); see Untied States v. Fitch 472 F2d 548, 549, fn. 5 (per curiam) (9th Cir. 1973). 

Plaintiffs are seeking to file a Motion to Exceed 10 Depositions and to Modify the

Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order (hereafter “Plaintiffs Motion”), which is also filed with this

application. The Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order has a discovery cut-off date of November

23, 2011. Plaintiffs have diligently been conducting discovery and coordinating dates of

availability with all Defendants’ counsel, which includes multiple parties. In doing so, Plaintiff

has only recently been able to depose some of the defendants involved in this case. These recent

depositions, along with the production of new documents served by Defendant Vino Farms and 

received by Plaintiffs on October 17, 2011, have led to the necessity for Plaintiffs’ Motion. 

APPLICATION AND ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR SERVICE OF MOTION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN

SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION; ORDER 2

Case 2:08-cv-01971-MCE-KJN Document 135 Filed 11/14/11 Page 2 of 4
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

Plaintiffs sought a stipulation from all parties with respect to these matters. Defendants

Green & Hemly, and Douglas Hemly have agreed to extend discovery cut-off and take in excess

of 10 depositions to allow for the depositions of Matthew Hemly and Jesus Yepez. Defendants

Vino Farms, Inc. have agreed to set an additional deposition pursuant to Fed. Rules Civ. Proc.

30(b)(6) but have otherwise refused to agreed to extend discovery cutoff or to take in excess of

10 depositions to depose their Executive Assistant. The remaining Defendants have refused to

stipulate to taking in excess of 10 depositions or extend the discovery cutoff with respect to these

depositions.

Plaintiffs are required to give 28 days notice of Plaintiffs’ Motion pursuant to Local Rule

230. Plaintiffs were informed by the court clerk, that the only date available to hear Plaintiffs’

Motion before the cut-off date for discovery is November 17, 2011. Plaintiffs could not have

filed this motion sooner as they were not aware that it would be needed in this case. Due to the

court’s calendar and the limited time remaining before the Court imposed discovery cut-off date,

the Plaintiffs are unable to give 28 days notice. 

Dated: October 24, 2011 CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE,

INC.

 /s/ Esmeralda Zendejas 

Esmeralda Zendejas

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Aguirre Batista, Arredondo

Huerta, Aguilar, Blas Jimenez, Blas Martinez, 

Garcia Castro, Garcia Michel, Lopez Ramos, Lopez

Rodriguez, Naranjo Campos, Pano Ruiz, Peña

Ochoa, Rodriguez Zepeda, Revolledo Godinez,

Torres Elias, Ayala Gonzalez, Garcia Gutierrez,

Rodriquez, Zuniga Arias, Murillo Guerrero, Carillo

Torres, Ceja Ruiz, Cruz Valverde, Montes Gaitan,

Diaz Campo, Esparza Ramirez, Martinez Marquez,

Meza Sanchez, Robles Rodriquez, L.M. Torres

Contreras, U. Torres Contreras, Bailon Marquez,

Ceja Ibarra, Sandoval Preciado, Cruz Barragan,

Mares Contreras 

///

///

APPLICATION AND ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR SERVICE OF MOTION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN

SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION; ORDER 3

Case 2:08-cv-01971-MCE-KJN Document 135 Filed 11/14/11 Page 3 of 4
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

Dated: October 24, 2010 CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE

FOUNDATION

TALAMANTES/VILLEGAS/CARRERA, LLP

 /s/ Julia Montgomery (As authorized on 10/24/11)

Julia L. Montgomery

Attorneys for all Plaintiffs

ORDER SHORTENING TIME

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exceed 10 Depositions and To Modify the

Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order may be served by means of electronic service to the attorney

of each Defendant no later than 4:00 p.m. on November 10, 2011.

A copy of this Order Shortening Time must be served along with the Motion.

The Court finds the issues have been sufficiently briefed, therefore no argument will be

heard on this motion or the Motion to Exceed 10 Depositions and to Modify the Amended

Scheduling Order.

Each Defendant shall have until 5:00 p.m. on December 1, 2011, to serve and file a

response to the Motion. 

Dated: November 14, 2011

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

APPLICATION AND ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR SERVICE OF MOTION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN

SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION; ORDER 4

Case 2:08-cv-01971-MCE-KJN Document 135 Filed 11/14/11 Page 4 of 4