Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01104/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01104-7/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Christopher Black
Plaintiff
Vincent Casten
Plaintiff
City of Marysville
Defendant
Kevin Conde
Plaintiff
Vianey Guadarrama Jr.
Plaintiff
Dennis Hauck
Plaintiff
Joshua Hendrickson
Plaintiff
Joshua McVay
Plaintiff
Brad Minton
Plaintiff
John Osbourn
Plaintiff
Geoffrey Page
Plaintiff
Keri Sachs
Plaintiff
Bart Santti
Plaintiff
Shawn Scott
Plaintiff
Cheryl Sheppard
Plaintiff
Jeri Sprague
Plaintiff
Michael Stout
Plaintiff

Document Text:

-1-

ORDER 

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

CAROLEE G. KILDUFF, ESQ., SB No. 107232 

J. SCOTT SMITH, ESQ., SB No. 151163 

ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF 

Attorneys at Law 

601 University Avenue, Suite 150 

Sacramento, CA 95825 

Telephone: (916) 564-6100 

Telecopier: (916) 564-6263 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY OF MARYSVILLE 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CHRISTOPHER BLACK, VINCENT 

CASTEN, KEVIN CONDE, VIANEY 

GUADARRAMA JR., DENNIS HAUCK, 

JOSHUA HENDRICKSON, JOSHUA 

McVAY, BRAD MINTON, JOHN 

OSBOURN, GEOFFREY PAGE, KERI 

SACHS, BART SANTTI, SHAWN SCOTT, 

CHERYL SHEPPARD, JERI SPRAGUE, 

MICHAEL STOUT, acting for themselves and 

others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

CITY OF MARYSVILLE, 

 Defendant. 

______________________________________

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No.: 06-CV-01104-GEB-EFB 

ORDER 

Defendant, City of Marysville has filed an ex parte application to continue the hearing on 

plaintiff’s discovery motion, set for Wednesday, September 19, 2007, due to the impending 

caesarian section surgery scheduled that same date for defense counsel’s wife. Defense counsel 

requests that the date be continued to October 3, 2007. When contacted by the court regarding 

whether or not plaintiff intended to file an opposition to the ex parte application, plaintiff 

informed the court that he was working with defense counsel to reach an agreement continuing 

Case 2:06-cv-01104-GEB-EFB Document 37 Filed 09/18/07 Page 1 of 2
-2-

ORDER 

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

the hearing to a date other than October 3, 2007, due to scheduling difficulties. Soon thereafter, 

the parties filed a stipulation, signed by counsel for both parties, stipulating to and requesting 

continuation of the hearing to October 10, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. before the undersigned. 

Good cause appearing, the September 19, 2007, hearing on plaintiff’s motion is 

continued to October 10, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. before the undersigned. By that stipulation, the 

parties also seek to modify various dates in the scheduling order. Pursuant to the scheduling 

order issued by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on September 6, 2006, that order shall not be 

modified except with leave of court upon a showing of good cause. It further cautions counsel 

that “a mere stipulation by itself to change dates does not constitute good cause.” Because the 

parties’ request to modify the scheduling order is not properly before this court, it is denied. 

SO ORDERED. 

DATED: September 18, 2007 

 ________________________ 

 EDMUND F. BRENNAN 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 2:06-cv-01104-GEB-EFB Document 37 Filed 09/18/07 Page 2 of 2