Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00873/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00873-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City of Yuba City, Department of Public Works
Defendant
Dean Scott
Plaintiff

Document Text:

-1-

STIPULATED REQUEST TO STAY THE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND 

ISSUANCE OF A SCHEDULING ORDER; [PROPOSED 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. SBN 107232 

CORI R. SARNO, ESQ. SBN 230559 

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 YUBA CITY 

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DEAN SCOTT, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CITY OF YUBA CITY, DEPARTMENT OF 

PUBLIC WORKS, and DOES 1 through 50, 

inclusive. 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No.: 08-CV-00873 LKK GGH 

STIPULATED REQUEST TO STAY THE 

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, JOINT 

STATUS REPORT AND ISSUANCE OF A 

SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER 

WHEREAS the Court’s April 25, 2008 Order provides that a Pre-trial Scheduling/Status 

Conference is to take place on July 7, 2008; 

WHEREAS the Order further provides that the parties are each to “file with the Court 

and serve upon all other parties...” a status report including a discussion of, among other things, 

anticipated discovery, whether a Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) discovery conference should be held and 

suggested cut-off days for discovery and cut-off dates for law and motion; 

WHEREAS Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss several of Plaintiff’s causes of 

action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) that is presently scheduled for hearing on June 30, 

2008; 

WHEREAS matters, including but not limited to anticipated discovery, subject matters of 

discovery, timing of discovery and proposed dates for discovery cut-off, law and motion cut-off, 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:08-cv-00873-LKK -GGH Document 14 Filed 06/24/08 Page 1 of 3
-2-

STIPULATED REQUEST TO STAY THE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND 

ISSUANCE OF A SCHEDULING ORDER; [PROPOSED 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

estimated length of trial and prospects for settlement cannot be properly assessed prior to a ruling 

on the motion to dismiss, the filing of an amended complaint, notice of what causes of action 

will actually be litigated and notice of Defendant’s affirmative defenses; 

WHEREAS before the pleadings are finalized, the parties’ Status Reports will be purely 

speculative as to each of the matters required therein; 

WHEREAS the status conference and the issuance of a Scheduling Order will trigger 

such things as mandatory disclosures pursuant to Fed. R. 26(a) which requiring disclosure of 

witnesses and the subject matters of the witnesses testimony, also cannot be determined until the 

pleadings are finalized such that the parties are aware of the issues raised by the pleadings; 

WHEREAS after the Scheduling Order is issued, a noticed motion Pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 16 and a showing of good cause is required to modify the scheduling order; 

WHEREAS the parties wish to avoid wasteful pretrial activities, such as motions to 

modify the scheduling order and believe that judicial economy is furthered and the burden on the 

parties and the Court are lessened by staying the status conference and the issuance of a pretrial 

scheduling order until the pleadings are finalized (i.e. there is a ruling on the motion to dismiss, 

an amended complaint has been filed and Defendant has filed an answer); 

THEREFORE, the parties, by and through their respective counsel, make the 

following stipulated request: 

That the Court stay the pretrial conference and deadline for submitting a joint status 

report until the pleadings are finalized (i.e. there is a ruling on the motion to dismiss, an amended 

complaint has been filed and Defendant has filed an answer). 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: June 24, 2008 ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF 

 /s/ Cori R. Sarno 

By:_________________________________ 

CAROLEE G. KILDUFF 

CORI R. SARNO 

Attorneys for Defendant CITY OF YUBA 

CITY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 

WORKS 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:08-cv-00873-LKK -GGH Document 14 Filed 06/24/08 Page 2 of 3
-3-

STIPULATED REQUEST TO STAY THE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND 

ISSUANCE OF A SCHEDULING ORDER; [PROPOSED 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

Dated: June 23, 2008 

LAW OFFICE OF BOWMAN & ASSOCIATES 

 

 /s/ Sean Gavin 

By:_________________________________ 

ROBERT C. BOWMAN, JR. 

SEAN GAVIN 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

The status conference is continued to August 28, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 24, 2008. 

 

I:CGK\Scott\pleadings\stip.doc

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:08-cv-00873-LKK -GGH Document 14 Filed 06/24/08 Page 3 of 3