Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01553/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01553-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:451 Employment Discrimination

---

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, PRE-TRIAL DATES; ORDER 1

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

29

Attorneys for Defendant MEGAN BRENNAN, POSTMASTER

 GENERAL, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FELIPE S. QUINONES,

Plaintiff,

v.

PATRICK R. DONAHOE, POSTMASTER 

GENERAL, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:13-cv-01553-LJO-EPG

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL,

PRE-TRIAL DATES; 

ORDER

(ECF No. 42)

Plaintiff Felipe S. Quinones (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Megan J. Brennan, (“Defendant”), by 

and through the undersigned counsel for the respective parties, hereby stipulate to the dates in this 

action for the good cause set forth below. 

Plaintiff challenges his removal from the position of a part time flexible clerk in the Lindsay 

Post Office alleging religious discrimination. Defendant disputes Plaintiff’s claims because it would 

be an undue hardship on the operations of the Lindsay Post Office to allow Plaintiff to have every 

Saturday off as there is only one other part time clerk to perform those duties on Saturdays. The 

parties have exchanged 6,000 pages of documents and taken four depositions, with five more 

confirmed at this time.1 

 

1

 The parties have taken four depositions: Glenda Bolosan, Froilan Bolosan, Linda Diniakos, and 

APWU president Michael Evans. The parties have confirmed the deposition of Plaintiff Felipe 

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

ALYSON A. BERG

Assistant United States Attorney

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401

Fresno, California 93721

Telephone: (559) 497-4000

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099

Case 1:13-cv-01553-DAD-EPG Document 45 Filed 10/29/15 Page 1 of 5
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, PRE-TRIAL DATES; ORDER 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

29

In an effort to conserve attorneys fees and costs, the parties request to extend all deadlines for 

approximately six-weeks to allow the Defendant to provide a written settlement offer with two weeks 

to consider the demand prior to returning to completing the remaining ten lay depositions, and at least 

two expert depositions. The parties have engaged in approximately three months of on-going 

settlement negotiations, including a productive settlement conference with the Honorable Judge 

Thurston on August 26, 2015.2 Although resolution was not reached in August, the negotiations led 

to a better understanding of the parties’ settlement parameters (i.e., reinstatement for Plaintiff) and a 

renewed effort by counsel to reach a mutually agreeable compromise. Meanwhile, because no 

settlement was reached, Plaintiff retained Tim Sottile as co-counsel in this matter, to serve as lead 

trial counsel, and the parties allowed a brief amount of time for co-counsel to review the file 

materials. 3

Before more fees and costs are incurred that could hinder a resolution of the lawsuit, Plaintiff 

submitted a partial settlement demand to which the Defendant will respond with a written offer and 

allow Plaintiff approximately two weeks to consider the offer of a complete resolution of the lawsuit. 

Because the parties are committed to focusing their efforts on resolution before incurring additional 

fees and costs, there is an agreement to return to Judge Thurston, if necessary, on November 10, 

2015, should negotiations amongst counsel be unsuccessful. While the parties are optimistic that 

resolution can be completed by November 10, 2015, they have agreed to resume conducting the 

remaining lay and expert depositions starting with the Plaintiff’s deposition on November 18, 2015. 

Nevertheless, a brief extension of the current deadlines to allow the parties to focus on a resolution 

before incurring additional fees and costs is warranted.

 

Quinones for November 18, 2015, and Mario Rodriguez and Eva Valdez for November 19, 2015. 

The depositions of Linda LaForce and David Vance are set for November 24, 2015, and the 

deposition of Kerry Wolny for December 1, 2015. The parties are in the process of finalizing the 

deposition dates and locations for Paul Pieroni, David Peer, Scott Warkentin, Anil Olivera, and 

Richard Pender.

2

 This date was continued from June 25, 2015 as the parties were still working to narrow their 

respective positions before using the services of Judge Thurston.

3

 Mr. Sottile has a trial calendared to begin the week before the present trial, and should it extend 

into the following week as expected, he will have a scheduling conflict.

Case 1:13-cv-01553-DAD-EPG Document 45 Filed 10/29/15 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, PRE-TRIAL DATES; ORDER 3

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

29

In addition to the parties commitment to seeking a resolution of the action by November 10, 

2015, the unexpected health concerns of Plaintiff’s counsel’s wife necessitates that the Plaintiff’s 

deposition originally scheduled for October 27, 2015 be continued to November 18, 2015. 

Another unexpected circumstance providing good cause for a brief extension of the current 

deadlines is the recent recognition that Plaintiff’s retained expert economist has several records, such 

as Social Security records and employment records, that are not in the possession of Defendant’s 

retained expert economist. Rather than involve the court, the parties have agreed to extend the 

deadline for Defendant’s expert report so that all the records may be considered and discussed in 

Defendant’s report. Accordingly, good cause exists to extend the discovery deadline so that the 

reports are as comprehensive as possible, which in turn, reduces the time for the expert depositions, 

and may obviate the need for the depositions.4 

Accordingly, the parties stipulate and agree to continue the following dates, and base it on the 

above-stated good cause: 

Old Date New Date

Close of Non Expert Discovery December 1, 2015 February 1, 2016

Plaintiff’s Expert Disclosure October 8, 2015 completed 

Defendant’s Expert Disclosure October 28, 2015 December 11, 2015

Rebuttal Expert Disclosure November 2, 2015 January 15, 2016

Expert Discovery Cut-Off December 1, 2015 January 30, 2016

Non- Dispositive Motions December 14, 2015 February 15, 2016

Dispositive Motions February 22, 2016 March 28, 2016

///

///

///

///

 

4

 Although this court has already extended the discovery cut off from July 31, 2015 to December 1, 

2015, the parties request the additional six-weeks to ensure the parties devote their time and energies 

to resolution on or before November 10, 2015.

Case 1:13-cv-01553-DAD-EPG Document 45 Filed 10/29/15 Page 3 of 5
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, PRE-TRIAL DATES; ORDER 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

29

Pre Trial Conference April 19, 2016 May 16, 2016

Trial Date: July 19, 2016 (3-4 days) September 19, 2016

Respectfully submitted,

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

Dated: October 26, 2015

/s/Alyson A. Berg

ALYSON A. BERG 

Attorney for Defendant Megan A. Brennan

Postmaster General, United States Postal Service 

CHURCH STATE COUNCIL 

(As authorized 10/26/15)

Dated: October 26, 2015 /s/Alan J. Reinach

Alan J. Reinach

Jonathon Cherne 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Felipe S. Quinones 

SOTTILE & BALTAXE 

(As authorized 10/26/15)

Dated: October 26, 2015 /s/Timothy Sottile

Timothy Sottile

Attorneys for Plaintiff Felipe S. Quinones

Case 1:13-cv-01553-DAD-EPG Document 45 Filed 10/29/15 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, PRE-TRIAL DATES; ORDER 5

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

29

ORDER

The Court, having considered the above Stipulation and finding good cause to amend its 

previous scheduling order, orders the following deadlines to be continued as follows:

PREVIOUS DATE NEW DATE

Non-expert discovery cutoff December 1, 2015 February 1, 2016

Defendant’s Expert 

Disclosure 

October 28, 2015 December 11, 2015

Rebuttal Expert Disclosure November 2, 2015 January 15, 2016

Expert discovery cutoff December 1, 2015 January 29, 2016

Non-dispositive motion filing 

deadline

December 14, 2015 February 16, 2016

Dispositive motion deadline February 22, 2016 March 28, 2016

Pretrial Conference January 12, 2016 May 24, 2016

Time: 8:15 a.m.

Dept.: 4

All other deadlines, including the trial date of July 19, 2016, remain as previously set by the 

Scheduling Conference Order (ECF No. 25) as amended by prior stipulations (ECF Nos. 27, 39). The 

parties are advised that the Court will disfavor any further extensions or amendments to the discovery 

schedule.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 28, 2015 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01553-DAD-EPG Document 45 Filed 10/29/15 Page 5 of 5