Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00438/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00438-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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

JOINT REQUEST TO MODIFY SHCEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

ELGUINDY, MEYER & KOEGEL, APC

DAVID L. PRICE, State Bar Number 088696

dprice@emklawyers.com

BENJAMIN D. KOEGEL, State Bar Number 266308

bkoegel@emklawyers.com

W. PATRICK CRONICAN, State Bar Number 300645

pcronican@emklawyers.com

2990 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 205

Roseville, CA 95661

Telephone: (916) 778-3310

Facsimile: (916) 330-4433

Attorneys for Plaintiff INFINITY ENERGY, INC., 

a California Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

INFINITY ENERGY, INC., a California 

Corporation,

Plaintiff,

vs.

INFINITE ENERGY HOMES SERVICES, 

INC.,

Defendant.

Case No.: 2:21-cv-00438-WBS-KJN

JOINT REQUEST TO MODIFY 

SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER 

THEREON

JUDGE: Hon. William B. Shubb

MAG.: Hon. Kendall J. Newman

FILED: March 10, 2021

TRIAL: October 11, 2022

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 16(b)(4), plaintiff Infinity Energy, Inc. 

(“Plaintiff”) and defendant Infinite Energy Home Services, Inc. (“Defendant”) (collectively, the 

“Parties”) jointly request the court modify the pretrial Scheduling Order, issued on January 4, 

2022.

The court has authority to modify the pretrial Scheduling Order for good cause. (FRCP 

Rule 16(b)(4)) 

The Parties herein have diligently pursued their discovery obligations as well as settlement 

discussions, however, given the complexity of issues raised in the litigation, the discovery 

Case 2:21-cv-00438-WBS-KJN Document 25 Filed 05/23/22 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

2

JOINT REQUEST TO MODIFY SHCEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

necessary to prepare for trial, and various scheduling issues, the Parties herein require additional 

time to complete a small number of outstanding discovery items. The Parties require an extension 

of the discovery cut-off date to complete certain depositions which have either yet to be completed 

due to scheduling obstacles or are of witnesses which have only recently been identified during 

PMQ depositions. Given the complexity of the issues raised, the numerous individuals identified 

for deposition, and the extent of written discovery, the Parties believe it is in the best interests of 

both sides to modify the Court’s pretrial Scheduling Order, and to continue the trial itself. 

The Parties have met and conferred and have identified the remaining depositions to be 

completed including Plaintiff’s PMQ, Cory Gilbert, Defendant’s PMQ, Rich Walton, Plaintiff’s 

and Defendant’s disclosed experts, and the brief conclusion of the deposition of Plaintiff’s PMQ, 

Wesley Armstrong. The parties have completed written discovery.

As such, the Parties respectfully request that the Court modify the January 4, 2022

Scheduling Order as follows:

1. The depositions of Plaintiff’s PMQ, Cory Gilbert, Defendant’s PMQ, Rich Walton, 

Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s disclosed experts, and the brief conclusion of Plaintiff’s 

PMQ, Wesley Armstrong, shall be conducted as to be completed by June 30, 2022.

All other discovery is closed.

2. All motions, except for motions for continuances, temporary restraining orders, or 

other emergency orders, shall be filed on or before August 31, 2022.

3. The Final Pretrial Conference shall be October 5, 2022, or as soon thereafter as the 

Court’s schedule shall allow.

4. The trial shall commence on November 30, 2022 at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter 

as the Court’s schedule shall allow.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:21-cv-00438-WBS-KJN Document 25 Filed 05/23/22 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

3

JOINT REQUEST TO MODIFY SHCEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

The Parties request that all other dates included in the January 4, 2022 Scheduling Order 

shall remain in effect.

Dated: May 20, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

ELGUINDY, MEYER & KOEGEL, APC

By: /s/ W. Patrick Cronican

David L. Price, Esq.

Benjamin D. Koegel, Esq. 

W. Patrick Cronican, Esq.

Attorneys for Plaintiff INFINITY ENGERY, INC., a 

California Corporation

Dated: May 20, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

KROGH & DECKER, LLP

By: /s/ Jason Eldred

Shawn M. Krogh, Esq.

Jason G. Eldred, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendant INFINITE ENERGY HOME 

SERVICES, INC.

Case 2:21-cv-00438-WBS-KJN Document 25 Filed 05/23/22 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

4

JOINT REQUEST TO MODIFY SHCEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

ORDER

Having found good cause exists pursuant to FRCP 16(b)(4), the court GRANTS the 

Parties’ motion to modify the January 4, 2022 pretrial Scheduling Order as follows:

1. The depositions of Plaintiff’s PMQ, Cory Gilbert, Defendant’s PMQ, Rich Walton, 

Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s disclosed experts, and the brief conclusion of Plaintiff’s 

PMQ, Wesley Armstrong, shall be conducted as to be completed by June 30, 2022. All 

other discovery is closed.

2. All motions, except for motions for continuances, temporary restraining orders, or 

other emergency orders, shall be filed on or before August 31, 2022.

3. The Final Pretrial Conference shall be October 24, 2022 at 1:30 p.m.

4. The trial shall commence on December 13, 2022 at 9:00 a.m.

All other dates contained in the January 4, 2022 Scheduling Order shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 20, 2022

Case 2:21-cv-00438-WBS-KJN Document 25 Filed 05/23/22 Page 4 of 4