Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00320/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00320-10/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bernard Canale
Defendant
Nancy Canale
Defendant
Shirlee Nolen
Defendant
Joel Lynn Nolen
Defendant
Nolen Properties, LLC
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1 

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

JOINT MOTION AND ORDER

KRISTEN CLARKE 

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights 

CARRIE PAGNUCCO 

Chief 

MEGAN K. WHYTE DE VASQUEZ 

Deputy Chief 

ARIELLE R. L. REID 

ALAN A. MARTINSON 

KATHERINE A. RAIMONDO 

Trial Attorneys 

Housing and Civil Enforcement Section 

United States Department of Justice 

950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20530 

Tel: (202) 598-1575

PHILLIP A. TALBERT

United States Attorney

EMILIA P. E. MORRIS

Assistant United States Attorney 

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401

Fresno, CA 93721

Tel: (559) 497-4000

Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

JOEL LYNN NOLEN; SHIRLEE NOLEN; 

NOLEN PROPERTIES, LLC; NANCY 

CANALE, as trustee of the Bernard Canale 

and Nancy Canale 1998 Revocable Trust; and 

BERNARD CANALE, by and through his 

successor in interest NANCY CANALE.

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No: 2:23-cv-00320-JAM-CKD

JOINT MOTION AND ORDER TO

PERMIT DEPOSITIONS FOLLOWING 

THE CLOSE OF THE DISCOVERY 

PERIOD

Plaintiff United States of America and Defendants Joel L. Nolen, Shirlee Nolen, Nolen 

Properties, LLC, Nancy Canale, as trustee of the Bernard Canale and Nancy Canale 1998 

Case 2:23-cv-00320-JAM-CKD Document 79 Filed 09/30/24 Page 1 of 6
2 

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

JOINT MOTION AND ORDER

Revocable Trust, and Bernard Canale, by and through his successor in interest Nancy Canale, 

stipulate and move the Court as follows: 

On September 14, 2023, the Court entered a Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF 44) 

(“Scheduling Order”). The Scheduling Order was subsequently modified on March 5, 2024 

(ECF 52), and June 18, 2024 (ECF 60). Under the current schedule, the discovery period ends 

on September 30, 2024. The parties will have completed all discovery by September 30, with 

the exception of three depositions, as set forth below. 

The parties request the Court modify the current Scheduling Order, ECF 60, to allow the 

depositions of Defendant Joel Nolen and defendants’ rebuttal expert Adam Howard to occur 

after the close of discovery on September 30. Additionally, the parties request that, if the United 

States’ Motion for a Protective Order (ECF 70) is denied, the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of the 

United States be allowed to occur after the close of discovery. 

A. Deposition of Adam Howard 

On August 16, 2024, Defendants Joel Lynn Nolen and Shirlee Nolen (the “Nolen 

Defendants”) served their Disclosure of Rebuttal Experts, which included a report from Mr. 

Adam Howard. On September 3, 2024, Plaintiff served a notice of deposition of Mr. Howard, 

setting a deposition date of September 23, 2024. On September 5, 2024, counsel for the Nolen 

Defendants indicated that Mr. Howard was not available on September 23. Counsel for the 

Nolen Defendants indicated that Mr. Howard was available on October 9 or 10, 2024. The 

parties do not believe that taking Mr. Howard’s deposition after the September 30, 2024, close of 

discovery will have any adverse effect on the current case schedule. The parties do not 

anticipate that Mr. Howard’s testimony will be relevant to any dispositive motions. 

Therefore, the parties request that the Court modify the Scheduling Order to allow Mr. 

Howard’s deposition to take place no later than October 10, 2024. 

B. Deposition of Joel Nolen 

On July 24, 2024, counsel for the United States contacted all defense counsel by email to 

inquire about their availability the week of September 9, 2024, for the depositions of Joel and 

Shirlee Nolen. On August 6, 2024, counsel for the Nolen Defendants confirmed that September 

Case 2:23-cv-00320-JAM-CKD Document 79 Filed 09/30/24 Page 2 of 6
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

JOINT MOTION AND ORDER

10 and 11, 2024 worked for the depositions of Joel and Shirlee Nolen. On August 9, 2024, the 

United States properly noticed Shirlee Nolen’s deposition for September 10, 2024, and Joel 

Nolen’s deposition for September 11, 2024. On September 10, 2024, the United States took the 

deposition of Shirlee Nolen. During defense counsel’s questioning of Mrs. Nolen that evening at 

the end of her deposition, counsel stated for the first time that Joel Nolen would not appear for 

his deposition the following day. Counsel objected to the questioning of Mr. Nolen based on his 

right against self-incrimination, in light of a criminal proceeding pending against Mr. Nolen in 

Lassen County Superior Court. 

On September 11, 2024, the United States appeared for the noticed deposition of Mr. 

Nolen. Neither Mr. Nolen nor his counsel appeared for the deposition. Later that morning, 

counsel held an informal telephonic discovery conference with Chief Magistrate Judge Delaney, 

who directed the parties to try to reach an agreement regarding Mr. Nolen’s deposition and, if no 

resolution was reached, to file a Motion to Compel and/or Motion for a Protective Order 

pursuant to Local Rule 251. See ECF No. 62. 

On September 19, 2024, counsel for the Nolen Defendants offered to allow Mr. Nolen to 

sit for a deposition on October 1, 2024, with conditions. Counsel for the United States 

responded that it could not agree to the conditions and was not available for a deposition on 

October 1 but would be available on October 7 or 8, 2024. On September 23, 2024, the parties 

agreed to take the deposition of Defendant Joel Nolen on October 8, 2024. The parties agreed 

that, to the extent Mr. Nolen would like to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against selfincrimination, he may do so on a question-by-question basis. The parties also agreed that if any 

dispute arises regarding the scope of Mr. Nolen’s invocation of the Fifth Amendment, they will 

not object to raising that dispute with the Court during or after the deposition on the grounds that 

the dispute is untimely.

The parties do not believe that taking Mr. Nolen’s deposition after the September 30, 

2024, close of discovery will have any adverse effect on the current case schedule. The parties 

do not anticipate that Mr. Nolen’s rescheduled deposition will delay the filing of any currently 

contemplated dispositive motions. Therefore, the parties request that the Court modify the 

Case 2:23-cv-00320-JAM-CKD Document 79 Filed 09/30/24 Page 3 of 6
4 

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

JOINT MOTION AND ORDER

Scheduling Order to allow Defendant Joel Nolen’s deposition to take place no later than October 

8, 2024, and further order that disputes regarding the invocation of the Fifth Amendment during 

that deposition may be raised with the Court after the close of discovery. 

C. Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of the United States

On September 10, 2024, Defendants Joel Nolen and Shirlee Nolen served a Notice of 

Taking Deposition of Plaintiff’s Person Most Knowledgeable on the United States. On 

September 13, 2024, counsel met and conferred regarding the topics noticed for the deposition. 

On September 20, 2024, the United States filed a motion for a protective order, seeking to 

prevent the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of the United States. The parties have stipulated to the 

shortening of time pursuant to Local Rule 144(e) and have sought a hearing on the motion by 

September 25, 2024. See ECF 71. 

The parties do not believe that taking the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of the United States, if 

ordered to occur, after the September 30, 2024, close of discovery will have any adverse effect 

on the current case schedule. The parties do not anticipate that any such testimony will be 

necessary in order to file any currently contemplated dispositive motions. 

Therefore, the parties request that the Court modify the Scheduling Order, ECF 60, to 

allow the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of the United States to take place after the close of discovery, 

if such a deposition is ordered to occur by Chief Magistrate Judge Delaney. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

For the United States: 

DATED: September 30, 2024 

PHILLIP A. TALBERT KRISTEN CLARKE

United States Attorney Assistant Attorney General 

Eastern District of California Civil Rights Division

 

/s/ Emilia P. E. Morris /s/ Arielle R. L. Reid 

EMILIA P. E. MORRIS CARRIE PAGNUCCO

Assistant United States Attorney Chief

 MEGAN K. WHYTE DE VASQUEZ

 Deputy Chief 

 ARIELLE R. L. REID 

Case 2:23-cv-00320-JAM-CKD Document 79 Filed 09/30/24 Page 4 of 6
5 

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

JOINT MOTION AND ORDER

ALAN A. MARTINSON

KATHERINE A. RAIMONDO 

Trial Attorneys

For the Defendants: 

DATED: September 30, 2024 SIERRA LAW CENTER, APC

By:/s/ Jacob Zamora

JACOB ZAMORA

Attorneys for Defendant 

NOLEN PROPERTIES, LLC

DATED: September 30, 2024 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & 

SMITH LLP

By:/s/ Jeffrey E. Schultz

JOHN S. POULOS

JEFFREY E. SCHULTZ

Attorneys for Defendants JOEL NOLEN 

and SHIRLEE NOLEN

DATED: September 30, 2024 JACOBS, ANDERSON, POTTER, HARVEY

AND CECIL LLP

By:/s/ Andrea Wieder

DOUG JACOBS

ANDREA WIEDER

Attorneys for Defendants NANCY 

CANALE and BERNARD CANALE

Case 2:23-cv-00320-JAM-CKD Document 79 Filed 09/30/24 Page 5 of 6
6 

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

JOINT MOTION AND ORDER

ORDER

 Good cause appearing, and the parties having stipulated, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

1. Plaintiff United States of America may conduct the deposition of Mr. Adam Howard by 

October 10, 2024, notwithstanding the close of discovery on September 30, 2024. 

2. Plaintiff United States of America may conduct the deposition of Defendant Joel Nolen 

by October 8, 2024, notwithstanding the close of discovery on September 30, 2024. 

3. Defendants Joel Nolen and Shirlee Nolen may conduct the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of 

the United States after September 30, 2024, if so ordered with respect to the United 

States’ Motion for Protective Order. 

4. Any disputes regarding Mr. Nolen’s invocation of the Fifth Amendment during his 

deposition may be raised with the Court after the close of discovery. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 30, 2024 /s/ John A. Mendez

THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:23-cv-00320-JAM-CKD Document 79 Filed 09/30/24 Page 6 of 6