Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00427/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00427-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lion Brothers Farms
Plaintiff
United States Department of Agriculture
Defendant

Document Text:

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

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

KIMBERLY A. GAAB (SBN 166452)

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Courthouse

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401

Fresno, California 93721

Telephone: (559) 497-4000

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099

Attorneys for Defendant United States Department of Agriculture

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LION BROTHERS FARMS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF )

AGRICULTURE, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

1:06-cv-00427-AWI-SMS

EX PARTE REQUEST TO EXTEND

DEFENDANT’S TIME TO RESPOND TO

COMPLAINT; THEREON 

 

ORDER CONTINUING SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE:

Old Date: 6/15/2006

NEW DATE: AUGUST 22, 2006

TIME: 9:30a.m.

COURTROOM: #7

Defendant United States Department of Agriculture

(“Defendant”) requests an extension of time to respond to the

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, filed April 13,

2006 (Docs. 3 & 5), based on the following:

1. Defendant was served with the summons and complaint on

April 20, 2006. Accordingly, its response to the complaint is

due on June 19, 2006.

2. Undersigned counsel for Defendant was not assigned to

this matter until approximately four weeks after service of the

135-page complaint, which consists of numerous voluminous

exhibits filed in two separate entries (see Docs. 3 & 5).

Case 1:06-cv-00427-OWW -SMS Document 11 Filed 06/02/06 Page 1 of 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

1 Nothing in this request is intended to constitute a waiver

of any defense that may be asserted by Defendant. Defendant

specifically reserves all of its defenses and objections in this

action, including without limitation its defenses and objections

under Rules 4, 8 and 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

and under all other applicable laws and procedural rules.

2

3. Undersigned counsel requested a 30-day extension to

respond to the complaint, but Plaintiff’s counsel refused the

request.

4. An additional 30 days is needed to respond to the

complaint to provide undersigned counsel and Defendant’s Office

of the General Counsel time to review the complaint and

voluminous exhibits and coordinate a response.

5. In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully requested

that the Court extend Defendant’s time to respond to the

complaint by 30 days to July 19, 2006.

6. Additionally, the scheduling conference is now set for

June 15, 2006, four days prior to the current deadline for

Defendant to respond to the complaint. It is further

respectfully requested that the Court postpone the scheduling

conference for approximately 60 days to August 17, 2006, or

another date that is convenient for the Court.1

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: June 2, 2006. McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Kimberly A. Gaab 

KIMBERLY A. GAAB

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant

United States of America

Case 1:06-cv-00427-OWW -SMS Document 11 Filed 06/02/06 Page 2 of 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

3

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED that:

(1) Defendant’s time to respond to the complaint is extended

to July 19, 2006; and

(2) The scheduling conference is continued from June 15,

2006 to August 22, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., in Courtroom 7.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 2, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00427-OWW -SMS Document 11 Filed 06/02/06 Page 3 of 3