Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01102/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01102-9/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Officer Bottoms
Defendant
J. Chandler
Defendant
Officer Ciccarelli
Defendant
City of Modesto
Defendant
Officer Cox
Defendant
Harvey Holcomb
Plaintiff
Officer Kroutil
Defendant
Jerry Ramar
Defendant
Richard Roe
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

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HARVEY HOLCOMB, 

Plaintiff,

v.

JERRY RAMAR, a Modesto Police officer; 

OFFICER KROUTIL, a Modesto Police 

officer; OFFICER COX, a Modesto Police 

officer; OFFICER BOTTOMS, a Modesto 

Police officer; OFFICER CICCARELLI, a 

Modesto Police officer; J. CHANDLER, a 

Modesto Police officer; JOHN DOE and 

RICHARD ROE, Modesto police officers, the 

true names and exact numbers of whom are 

unknown at this time; CITY OF MODESTO, a 

municipal corporation,

Defendants. _____________________________________/

Case No. 1:13-cv-01102-AWI-SKO

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

EXTENDING DISCOVERY CUT-OFF

STIPULATION

The parties to this Stipulation are Plaintiff HARVEY HOLCOMB (“Plaintiff” or 

“Holcomb”) and Defendants CITY OF MODESTO, JERRY RAMAR, JAIME COX, BEN 

KROUTIL, JOSEPH BOTTOMS, TOM CICCARELLI and JEANNE CHANDLER 

(“Defendants”), collectively, (“Parties”). 

WHEREAS, the Parties have been working cooperatively to complete the necessary 

discovery by the current deadline of July 1, 2015. Defendants agreed that they would supplement 

Anthony Boskovich, No. 121198

Law Offices of Anthony Boskovich

28 N. First Street, 6th Floor

San Jose, California 95113-1210

(408) 286-5150

policemisconduct@compuserve.com

Attorney for plaintiff HARVEY HOLCOMB

Case 1:13-cv-01102-AWI-SKO Document 44 Filed 06/30/15 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

their responses to written discovery that had been answered by former counsel and that plaintiff 

would depose some or all of the individually named defendants after that supplementation. Two 

defendants are no longer employed by the City of Modesto and counsel for defendants had an 

intervening trial, so supplemental responses were served on plaintiff on June 23, 2015, thus 

precluding depositions within the current schedule. Accordingly, the parties are requesting a brief 

continuance of the discovery cut-off and expert disclosures to August 15, 2015. The Parties are 

not requesting that the dispositive motions date, pretrial conference, or trial be continued and do 

not believe that the brief extension requested will interfere in any way with the trial date of 

January 12, 2016.

The discovery that plaintiff will do is the depositions of the defendants. The parties will 

also meet and confer regarding potential disputes regarding the written discovery that will be 

resolved by the new deadline. 

WHEREFORE, the Parties agree and stipulate that the scheduling order be amended as 

follows:

Case Management Event: Prior-Operative DateDeadline:Stipulated-Deadline:

Non-Expert Discovery Deadline July 1, 2015 August 15, 2015

Expert Disclosures July 10, 2015 August 15, 2015

Rebuttal-Supplemental Expert Disclosures July 24, 2015 August 28, 2015

Expert Discovery Deadline August 7, 2015 September 11, 2015

All other dates remain as set.

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

DATED: June 25, 2015 By: /S/ Blake P. Loebs

Blake P. Loebs

Kevin P. McLaughlin

MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & 

WILSON

Attorney for Defendants

DATED: June 25, 2015 By: /S/ Anthony Boskovich

Anthony Boskovich

LAW OFFICES OF ANTHONY 

BOSKOVICH

Attorney for Plaintiff

HARVEY HOLCOMB

Case 1:13-cv-01102-AWI-SKO Document 44 Filed 06/30/15 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

ORDER 

An informal telephonic conference was held on June 30, 2015; Anthony Boskovich, Esq., 

appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff; Blake Loebs, Esq., appeared on behalf of the Defendants. 

Good cause appearing, the Parties’ stipulated request for an extension of discovery 

deadlines will be granted in part. To best accommodate the Parties’ request and the Court’s 

calendar, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the dates be extended as follows:

Case Management Event: Prior-Operative 

Date-Deadlines:

Parties’ Requested 

Deadlines:

Final Deadlines:

Non-Expert Discovery 

Deadline

July 1, 2015 August 15, 2015 August 15, 2015

Expert Disclosures July 13, 2015 August 15, 2015 August 15, 2015

Rebuttal-Supplemental 

Expert Disclosures

July 24, 2015 August 28, 2015 August 28, 2015

Expert Discovery Deadline August 7, 2015 September 11, 2015 September 11, 2015

Non-Dispositive Motion

Filing Deadline

July 31, 2015 Unchanged August 12, 2015

Non-Dispositive Motion 

Hearing Deadline

None Unchanged September 9, 2015

Dispositive Motion (MSJ) 

Filing Deadline

None August 10, 2015 August 17, 2015

Dispositive Motion (MSJ) 

Hearing Deadline

September 7, 2015 Unchanged September 21, 2015

Final Pre-Trial Conference November 4, 2015

10:00 a.m., Ctrm 2

Unchanged Unchanged

TRIAL January 12, 2016

8:30 a.m., Ctrm 2

Jury Trial

Unchanged Unchanged

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 30, 2015 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01102-AWI-SKO Document 44 Filed 06/30/15 Page 3 of 3