Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01901/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01901-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Denial of Overtime Compensation

---

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-

MICHAEL L. TRACY, ESQ., SBN 237779

MTRACY@MICHAELTRACYLAW.COM

MEGAN ROSS HUTCHINS, ESQ., SBN 227776

MHUTCHINS@MICHAELTRACYLAW.COM

LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL TRACY

2030 Main Street, Suite 1300

Irvine, CA 92614

T: (949) 260-9171

F: (866) 365-3051

Attorneys for Plaintiff

DONALD ARMSTRONG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

DONALD ARMSTRONG,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

DISTRIBUTORS, INC. , et al

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:09-cv-01901-DLB

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 

EXTEND NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY

The parties stipulate to the following:

1. Pursuant to the scheduling order (document #12) the existing non-expert 

discovery cut off is July 30, 2010.

2. The trial is currently set for January 11, 2010.

3. The parties have been working diligently on discovery. To date, the 

Plaintiff’s deposition has been taken, and parties have conducted several rounds of written 

discovery and request for documents.

4. Counsel have been working together to schedule one day of a 30(b)(6) 

deposition of the defendant. Plaintiff’s noticed the deposition on June 22, 2010, but due to 

Case 1:09-cv-01901-DLB Document 16 Filed 08/03/10 Page 1 of 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

-2-

the 30(b)6 designee of defendant’s schedule, and in light of the fact that Counsel for 

Defendant’s was called to jury duty on the agreed date the deposition would take place, 

counsel have agreed that August 11, 2010 would be the best date for the deposition to go 

forward.

5. Plaintiff served written discovery on June 22, 2010, but due to Counsel for 

defendant’s schedule the parties agreed the responses would be due on August 3, 2010.

6. An extension of the non-expert discovery cutoff is necessary so that the 

30(b)(6) deposition of defendants and written discovery request can be completed.

7. As such, the parties require a 12 day extension to conduct the numerated 

discovery.

DATED: July 30, 2010 LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL TRACY

By: __________/s/_____________________________

MEGAN ROSS HUTCHINS, Attorney for 

Plaintiff DONALD ARMSTRONG

DATED: July 30, 2010 DAMRELL, NELSON, SCHRIMP, 

PALLIOS, PACHER & SILVA

By: _______________________________________

Clinton P. Walker

Attorneys for Defendants

IT IS SO ORDERED THAT:

ORDER

Plaintiff may conduct the 30(b)(6) deposition on August 11, 2010, and Defendants may serve 

their discovery response on August 3, 2010. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 2, 2010 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

DEAC_Sig nature-END:

Case 1:09-cv-01901-DLB Document 16 Filed 08/03/10 Page 2 of 2