Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_96-cv-06053/USCOURTS-caed-1_96-cv-06053-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
California Table Grape Commission
Defendant
Delano Farms Company
Plaintiff

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

28 1 

US1DOCS 5483645v1

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 

Seth P. Waxman 

Randolph D. Moss 

Todd Zubler 

Brian M. Boynton #222193 

2445 M Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20037-1420 

BAKER, MANOCK & JENSEN 

A Professional Corporation 

Robert D. Wilkinson #100478 

Fig Garden Financial center 

5260 North Palm Avenue, Fourth Floor 

Fresno, California 93704-2209 

Counsel for Defendant THE CALIFORNIA TABLE GRAPE COMMISSION 

LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN C. LEIGHTON 

Brian C. Leighton #090907 

701 Pollasky Avenue 

Clovis, California 93612 

Counsel for Plaintiffs DELANO FARMS COMPANY, THE SUSAN NEILL COMPANY, and 

LUCAS BROS. PARTNERSHIP 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DELANO FARMS COMPANY, ) 

a Washington corporation, ) 

THE SUSAN NEILL COMPANY, ) Case No. CV-F-96-6053 OWW DLB 

a California corporation, ) 

LUCAS BROS. PARTNERSHIP, ) STIPULATION AND ORDER 

a California Partnership, ) MODIFYING DATES AND EXTENDING 

 ) PAGE LIMITS 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) 

v. ) 

 ) 

THE CALIFORNIA TABLE ) 

GRAPE COMMISSION, ) 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

 ) 

______________________________) 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:96-cv-06053-OWW -DLB Document 283 Filed 02/01/06 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

28 2 

US1DOCS 5483645v1

WHEREAS Defendant the California Table Grape Commission intends to file a motion for 

summary judgment raising a number of constitutional defenses to Plaintiffs’ First Amendment 

challenge to the Ketchum Act; 

WHEREAS Plaintiffs may file a cross-motion for summary judgment on their First 

Amendment claims; 

WHEREAS the current schedule calls for the parties to file motions for summary judgment 

on February 10, 2006, oppositions to motions for summary judgment on March 10, 2006, and replies 

in support of motions for summary judgment on March 24, 2006; 

WHEREAS professional and personal commitments of counsel for Plaintiffs have made 

adherence to the current schedule difficult; 

WHEREAS counsel for the parties have conferred and agree that a two-week extension of 

the current schedule will facilitate effective briefing of the anticipated motion or motions for 

summary judgment; and 

WHEREAS the parties agree that in order effectively to present the issues likely to arise in a 

motion or motions for summary judgment they will need to submit briefs in excess of the 25-page 

limit for opening and opposition briefs and the 10-page limit for reply briefs set in the Court’s 

Standing Order; 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties to this action, through their respective 

attorneys of record, that the page limit for briefs in support of any motions for summary judgment be 

extended to 50 pages, that the page limit for briefs in opposition to any such motions be extended to 

35 pages, that the page limit for reply briefs in support of any such motions be extended to 25 pages, 

and that the following scheduling revisions be adopted by the Court: 

Event Revised Date 

Proposed Statements of Undisputed Facts Filed with 

the Court 

February 24, 2006 

Motions for Summary Judgment February 24, 2006 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:96-cv-06053-OWW -DLB Document 283 Filed 02/01/06 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

28 3 

US1DOCS 5483645v1

Oppositions to Motions for Summary Judgment March 24, 2006 

Replies to Motions for Summary Judgment April 7, 2006 

Dated: January 26, 2006 WILMER CUTLER PICKERING 

 HALE AND DORR LLP 

Seth P. Waxman 

Randolph D. Moss 

Todd Zubler 

Brian M. Boynton 

BAKER, MANOCK & JENSEN 

Robert D. Wilkinson 

/s/ Brian M. Boynton 

By _____________________________ 

Brian M. Boynton 

Counsel for Defendant THE CALIFORNIA TABLE 

GRAPE COMMISSION 

Dated: January 26, 2006 LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN C. LEIGHTON 

/s/ Brian C. Leighton (as authorized 1-25-06) 

By ___________________________ 

Brian C. Leighton 

Counsel for Plaintiffs DELANO FARMS COMPANY, 

THE SUSAN NEILL COMPANY, and LUCAS 

BROS. PARTNERSHIP 

ORDER 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: __Jan. 27, 2006 /s/ OLIVER W. WANGER____________ 

 _____________________________ 

 Oliver W. Wanger 

 United States District Judge 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:96-cv-06053-OWW -DLB Document 283 Filed 02/01/06 Page 3 of 3