Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-02571/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-02571-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract

---

- 1 – 

Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Modify 

the Status Order; Order

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

Lawrance A. Bohm (SBN: 208716) 

BOHM LAW GROUP 

4600 Northgate, Suite 210 

Sacramento, CA 95834 

Telephone: (916) 927-5574 

Facsimile: (916) 927-2056 

Erika M. Gaspar (SBN: 238117) 

LAW OFFICE OF ERIKA M. GASPAR 

8880 Cal Center Drive, Suite 400 

Sacramento, CA 95826 

(916) 361-6505 

(916) 361-6515 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

SUKHVIR ATWAL 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SUKHVIR ATWAL, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

MANOR CARE OF CITRUS HEIGHTS 

CA, LLC, et. al., 

 Defendants. 

 

 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 2:08-cv-02571-FCD-EFB 

 

PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION 

TO MODIFY THE STATUS 

(PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER; 

ORDER 

Hearing Date: Sept. 24, 2010 

Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m. 

Dept. 2 

Pursuant to Local Rule 78-230, the Standing Order of the Court, and this Court’s Status 

Scheduling Order of December 30, 2008, Plaintiff Sukhvir Atwal respectfully submits the 

following motion to modify the status (pretrial scheduling) order as follows: 

Case 2:08-cv-02571-KJM-EFB Document 20 Filed 08/13/10 Page 1 of 3
- 2 – 

Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Modify 

the Status Order; Order

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

I. REQUESTED MODIFICATIONS TO DATES OF STATUS ORDER: 

By the Court’s own motion, the Final Pretrial Conference has been reset for December 

3, 2011 and the Trial is reset for February 15, 2011. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests the 

following modifications to the Status Order: 

Previous Date: Proposed New Date

October 16, 2009 – Disclosure of Experts October 19, 2010 

November 16, 2009 – Supplemental Disclosure of Experts November 19, 2010 

December 31, 2009 – Completion of Expert Discovery January 3, 2011 

April 23, 2010 – Joint Pretrial Statement to be filed November 26, 2011 

With respect to the Disclosure of Experts, the parties have stipulated that the only 

expert to be disclosed by Plaintiff will be Charles A. Mahla Ph.D. as an economics expert. It is 

the belief of the parties that the assistance provided by the above-named economic expert will 

aid in a possible pre-trial resolution of this case. 

Further, the parties stipulate to elect referral of action to Voluntary Dispute Resolution 

Program (VDRP) pursuant to Local Rule 16-271. 

GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR MODIFICATION OF STATUS ORDER: 

1. As indicated above, the parties are stipulating to elect referral of action to 

Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program. Modification to the Status Order is required to 

provide the parties with the opportunity to fully take advantage of the alternative dispute 

resolution process. 

Case 2:08-cv-02571-KJM-EFB Document 20 Filed 08/13/10 Page 2 of 3
- 3 – 

Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Modify 

the Status Order; Order

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. Good Cause exists in that the Court, by its own motion, changed the trial date 

for the case. Accordingly, the parties have subsequently agreed to pursue alternative dispute 

resolution of this matter. In order to facilitate possible resolution of the case through the 

Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program, the parties have agreed to seek relief from the court as 

to the above deadlines imposed by the Status Pretrial Scheduling Order. 

3. Good cause exists because judicial efficiency support rescheduling of 

prelitigation deadlines to avoid unnecessary litigation expense. 

4. Good cause exists in that Plaintiff recently retained Attorney Lawrance A. 

Bohm for further handling including lead trial counsel. 

5. Further, neither party would be prejudiced by the requested modification to the 

Status Scheduling Order. 

Dated: Aug. 12, 2010 By: /s/ Lawrance A. Bohm 

 LAWRANCE A. BOHM (SBN: 208716) 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 

 

Dated: Aug. 12, 2010 By: /s/ Erika M. Gaspar 

 ERIKA M. GASPAR (SBN 238117) 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 IT IS SO ORDERED: 

Date: August 12, 2010 

Case 2:08-cv-02571-KJM-EFB Document 20 Filed 08/13/10 Page 3 of 3