Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01874/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01874-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael David LLC
Counter Defendant
Oak Ridge Winery LLC
Counter Claimant

Document Text:

[PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING 

HEARING [CASE NO. 2:15-CV-01874-WBS-AC] 

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 

VEDDER PRICE (CA), LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

VEDDER PRICE (CA), LLP 

Robert S. Beiser, Bar No. 0158682, Admitted Pro Hac Vice 

rbeiser@vedderprice.com 

Alain Villeneuve, Bar No. 06279975, Admitted Pro Hac Vice 

avilleneuve@vedderprice.com 

Lucky Meinz, Bar No. 260632 

lmeinz@vedderprice.com 

275 Battery Street, Suite 2464 

San Francisco, California 94111 

T: +1 (415) 749 9500 

F: +1 (415) 749 9502 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Michael David LLC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

MICHAEL DAVID LLC, a California limited 

liability company, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

OAK RIDGE WINERY LLC, a California 

limited liability company, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 2:15-CV-01874-WBS-AC 

[PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING 

HEARING AND SUSPENDING 

DISCOVERY 

Hearing Date: June 22, 2016 

Time: 10:00 a.m. 

Courtroom: 26 

Judge: Hon. Allison Claire 

OAK RIDGE WINERY LLC, a California 

limited liability company, 

Counter-Claimant, 

v. 

MICHAEL DAVID LLC, a California limited 

liability company, 

Counter-Defendant. 

The Court has considered Oak Ridge’s Winery LLC’s Motion to Compel and Michael 

David LLC’s response thereto. 

Good cause appearing therefor, Michael David’s request to continue the hearing 

scheduled for June 22, 2016 is GRANTED. 

/// 

Case 2:15-cv-01874-WBS-AC Document 38 Filed 06/17/16 Page 1 of 2
[PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING 

HEARING - 2 - [CASE NO. 2:15-CV-01874-WBS-AC] 

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 

VEDDER PRICE (CA), LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

The Court finds that the record indicates that additional time before a hearing on the 

merits of Oak Ridge’s Motion to Compel is warranted given the on-going discussion between the 

parties and the progress toward settlement. The hearing on the pending motion is hereby 

continued until August 3, 2016. If the parties are able to resolve the motion pending before the 

court, Oak Ridge shall promptly withdraw it motion. If the parties are unable to resolve the 

motion before the court, the parties shall submit a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement 

pursuant to Local Rule 251(c) no later than July 25, 2016. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 16, 2016 

Case 2:15-cv-01874-WBS-AC Document 38 Filed 06/17/16 Page 2 of 2