Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00592/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00592-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

5945839 

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

REX S. HEINKE (SBN 66163) 

KALIA C. PETMECKY (SBN 194094) 

AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 

2029 Century Park East, Suite 2400 

Los Angeles, California 90067-3012 

Telephone: 310-229-1000 

Facsimile: 310-229-1001 

Attorneys for Defendant, CITY OF SEATTLE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 

COMPANY, a California 

Corporation,, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

ARIZONA ELECTRIC POWER 

COOPERATIVE, INC., CITY OF 

ANAHEIM; CITY OF AZUSA; CITY OF 

BANNING; CITY OF BURBANK; CITY 

OF GLENDALE; CITY OF LOS 

ANGELES; CITY OF PASADENA; CITY 

OF RIVERSIDE; CITY OF SANTA 

CLARA; CITY OF SEATTLE; CITY OF 

VERNON; EUGENE WATER AND 

ELECTRIC BOARD; LOS ANGELES 

DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER; 

MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT; 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER 

AGENCY; PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 

NO. 2 OF GRANT COUNTY; 

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY 

DISTRICT; SALT RIVER PROJECT 

AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENT AND 

POWER DISTRICT; AND TURLOCK 

IRRIGATION DISTRICT, 

Defendants

Case No. 2:06-CV-0592-MCE-KJM 

[Assigned To The Honorable Morrison 

C. England, Jr.] 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

EXTENDING DEFENDANT CITY 

OF SEATTLE’S TIME TO 

ANSWER 

Date Action File: March 23, 2006 

Case 2:06-cv-00592-MCE -KJM Document 198 Filed 02/16/07 Page 1 of 3
5945839 

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 AND PROPOSED ORDER

WHEREAS, plaintiff San Diego Gas & Electric Company (“SDG&E”) filed a 

complaint in this action on March 23, 2006 (“Complaint”); 

WHEREAS, the parties entered into a Stipulation and Order (“Stipulation”), 

which among other things, sets forth a briefing and hearing schedule for preliminary 

motions; 

WHEREAS, several defendants filed Motions to Dismiss which were heard on 

October 24, 2006; 

WHEREAS, the Court took the Motions to Dismiss under submission and has not 

yet issued a ruling thereon; 

WHEREAS, defendant City of Seattle did not file a preliminary motion and 

intends to file an Answer in response to SDG&E’s Complaint; 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:06-cv-00592-MCE -KJM Document 198 Filed 02/16/07 Page 2 of 3
5945839 

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

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and 

between plaintiff SDG&E and defendant City of Seattle, through their respective 

counsel of record, that the City of Seattle’s time to file and serve its Answer to 

SDG&E’s Complaint shall be extended to and including April 13, 2007. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: February 12, 2007 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & 

FELD LLP 

By /s/ 

Kalia C. Petmecky 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY OF SEATTLE 

Dated: February 12, 2007 HENNIGAN, BENNETT &DORMAN 

LLP 

By /s/ 

Robert W. Mockler 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 

COMPANY 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: February 16, 2007

__________________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:06-cv-00592-MCE -KJM Document 198 Filed 02/16/07 Page 3 of 3