Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00051/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00051-7/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
County of Contra Costa
Defendant
Lori Koch
Defendant
Gus S. Kramer
Defendant
Bernice Peoples
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

1159P216PYP -1- 

STIPULATION RE: EXPERT DISCOVERY (C07-00051 MHP)

PAMELA Y. PRICE (STATE BAR NO. 107713)

PRICE AND ASSOCIATES

A Professional Law Corporation

1611 Telegraph Avenue, Ste. 1450

Oakland, CA 94612

Telephone: (510) 452-0292

Facsimile: (510) 452-5625

E-mail: pypesq@aol.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

BERNICE PEOPLES

PETER OBSTLER (S.B. #171623) – pobstler@omm.com 

ROBIN M. WALL (S.B. #235690) – rwall@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

Embarcadero Center West 275 Battery Street San Francisco, CA 94111-3305 

Telephone: (415) 984-8700 

Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 

CHRISTOPHER D. CATALANO (S.B. #208606) – ccatalano@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

1625 Eye Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006-4001 

Telephone: (202) 383-5300 

Facsimile: (202) 383-5414 

Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, 

GUS S. KRAMER, and LORI KOCH 

UNITED STATES DISTRICTCOURT

NORTHERN DISTRICTOF CALIFORNIA

BERNICE PEOPLES,

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, GUS

S. KRAMER in his individual capacity,

LORI KOCH in her individual capacity,

and DOES 1 through 15 inclusive,

Defendants.

NO. C07-00051 MHP

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER TO ENLARGE EXPERT

DISCOVERY DATES 

Case 3:07-cv-00051-MHP Document 57 Filed 04/08/08 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

1159P216PYP -2- 

STIPULATION RE: EXPERT DISCOVERY (C07-00051 MHP)

The parties, having met and conferred by and through their respective counsel,

stipulate to enlarge the expert discovery schedule in this action by one week, and jointly

request an Order of the Court approving the stipulation. Good cause for the Order exists for

the following reasons.

1. The parties have been diligent in their efforts to complete fact discovery,

which closed February 29, 2008. This included numerous depositions in February and

March. Due to circumstances beyond either counsel’s control, two depositions remain to be

completed. The parties expect to complete these depositions during the first week of April

2008. Two of Plaintiff’s experts need additional time to complete their expert witness

reports and defense counsel has agreed to grant a one week extension at the request of

Plaintiff’s counsel.

2. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request a revised expert discovery

schedule as follows:

Event Date Revised Date

Disclosure of Expert

Witnesses

April 1, 2008 April 8, 2008

Disclosure of Rebuttal

Expert Witnesses

April 22, 2008 April 29, 2008

Close of Expert Discovery May 16, 2008 May 23, 2008

3. Counsel for all parties have determined that neither side will be

prejudiced by the extensions requested herein. In addition, the extensions requested herein

will not affect any other dates. 

4. Under the Court’s January 11, 2008 Order adopting the parties’

stipulated request, the expert witness disclosure date was extended from February 15, 2008

to February 25, 2008, the rebuttal expert witness disclosure was extended from March 8,

2008 to March 17, 2008, and the close of expert discovery, which had not previously been

Case 3:07-cv-00051-MHP Document 57 Filed 04/08/08 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

1159P216PYP -3- 

STIPULATION RE: EXPERT DISCOVERY (C07-00051 MHP)

set, was set for April 15, 2008. The parties have previously requested and received the

January 11, 2008 scheduling order, as well as orders relating to the depositions of Randy

Becker and Paul Choroski. On February 22, 2008, the parties jointly requested an

enlargement of the expert witness discovery deadlines in order to accommodate Defendants’

scheduling of a mental examination of the Plaintiff. The Court approved that Stipulation on

February 26, 2008. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: March 28, 2008 PRICE AND ASSOCIATES 

 /s/ Pamela Y. Price 

Pamela Y. Price, Attorneys for Plaintiff

BERNICE PEOPLES 

Dated: March ___, 2008 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

By: __/s/ Christopher D. Catalano__ 

Christopher D. Catalano 

Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF

CONTRA COSTA, GUS S. KRAMER

and LORI KOCH 

I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has

been obtained from Christopher D. Catalano.

Dated: March ___, 2008 PRICE AND ASSOCIATES

By: /s/ Pamela Y. Price 

ORDER

Pursuant to the foregoing stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing

therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties’ proposed revisions for the dates for

initial expert disclosures, rebuttal expert disclosures, and the expert discovery cut-off, are

adopted as an Order of this Court. 

Dated: ___________________ 

HON. MARILYN HALL PATEL

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

4/7/08

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DI

CT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:07-cv-00051-MHP Document 57 Filed 04/08/08 Page 3 of 3