Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02181/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02181-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Silgan Containers Corporation
Counter Claimant
Dana Wilber
Counter Defendant

Document Text:

STIPULATION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER 

CASE NO. 2:06-CV-02181-MCE-EFB 

SFCA_1187834.3 

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

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

ONE MARITIME PLAZA, SIXTH FLOOR 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111-3409 

TELEPHONE: 415.434.4484 

FACSIMILE: 415.434.4507 

JOHN H. DOUGLAS CA BAR NO. 178966 

KRISTY KUNISAKI CA BAR NO. 241005 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT AND COUNTER-CLAIMANT, 

SILGAN CONTAINERS CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANA WILBER, AN INDIVIDUAL

PLAINTIFF, 

VS. 

SILGAN CONTAINERS CORPORATION, A 

DELAWARE CORPORATION AND DOES 1-50,

DEFENDANTS. 

SILGAN CONTAINERS CORPORATION, A 

DELAWARE CORPORATION, 

COUNTER-CLAIMANT, VS. 

DANA WILBER, AN INDIVIDUAL

 COUNTER-DEFENDANT

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO. 2:06-CV-02181-MCE-EFB 

STIPULATION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING 

ORDER AND TO REVISE PRETRIAL 

CONFERENCE AND TRIAL DATES; ORDER 

[F.R.C.P. Rule 16(b); L.R. Rules 16-281 

& 83-143] 

JUDGE: HON. MORRISON ENGLAND

In accordance with Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local 

Rules for the United States District Court, Eastern District (“L.R.”) Rule 83-143 and Rule 

16-281, Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant DANA WILBER and Defendant and CounterClaimant, SILGAN CONTAINERS CORPORATION (“Silgan” or “Defendant”) hereby 

stipulate to modify and revise the dates of the pretrial conference and trial dates in the 

Pretrial (Status) Scheduling Order, filed by the Court on January 9, 2007 and the Minute 

Case 2:06-cv-02181-MCE -EFB Document 41 Filed 03/18/08 Page 1 of 3
2

SFCA_1187834.3 

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

Order, filed by the Court on September 24, 2007 (collectively “the Scheduling Order”).1 

Good cause exists for this stipulation as follows: 

1. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order, the Court scheduled a Pretrial 

Conference in this action for April 11, 2008. 

2. Under the Scheduling Order, a joint pretrial conference statement and 

related submissions must be submitted by the parties by March 21, 2008. 

3. Thereafter, on December 11, 2007, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary 

Judgment. [See Dkt. #26.] On the Court’s own motion and pursuant to Local Rule 78-

230(h), the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, scheduled for hearing on 

January 11, 2008, was submitted without oral argument and the motion remains pending 

and under active consideration by the Court at this time. [See Dkt. #39.] 

4. Depending on the Court’s disposition of the Motion for Summary 

Judgment, the parties’ preparation for, and required submissions for, the pretrial 

conference may be significantly impacted. Thus, if the Court grants the Motion in its 

entirety, the jury trial in this action will be obviated and the parties will avoid incurring 

the anticipated substantial attorney’s fees required to prepare the pretrial submissions. 

On the other hand, if the Motion is partially granted or denied in its entirety, the Court’s 

decision will better inform the parties on their pretrial submissions under the Scheduling 

Order. Finally, the modification of the Scheduling Order sought by the parties will 

provide additional time after the adjudication of Defendant’s Motion for Summary 

Judgment for the parties to pursue settlement. 

5. In these circumstances, modification of the Scheduling Order will 

effectuate the purpose F.R.C.P. Rule 1 “... (t)o secure the just, speedy and inexpensive 

determination of every action.” 

 1

 On September 24, 2007, on the Courts own motion, the 4/14/2008 Final Pretrial 

Conference was advanced to 4/11/2008, and the jury trial was continued to 5/19/2008. 

The Minute Order also ordered the Joint Final Pretrial Statement to be due not later than 

3/21/2008. [See Dkt. #21.] 

Case 2:06-cv-02181-MCE -EFB Document 41 Filed 03/18/08 Page 2 of 3
3

SFCA_1187834.3 

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

Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that the Court modify the existing 

Scheduling Order by revising the pretrial conference and trial dates (and corresponding 

deadlines) by extending the current dates 90 days and submit the following schedule: 

 Existing Date Proposed Date

Final Pretrial Conference April 11, 2008 November 21, 2008 at 

9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7 

Joint Final Pretrial 

Conference Statement 

March 21, 2008 October 31, 2008 

Production of all trial 

exhibits 

May 7, 2008 at 3:00 p.m. December 15, 2008 by 

3:00 p.m. 

Trial May 19, 2008 January 5, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. 

in Courtroom 7 

The parties further stipulate to refer this action for alternative dispute resolution, 

such as a private mediation or a Mandatory Settlement Conference before a magistrate 

judge, after the Court files its order on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment but 

no later than 60 days before the proposed stipulated trial date. 

Dated: MARCH 12, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL L. TRACY

MICHAEL L. TRACY

MEGAN ROSS HUTCHINS

/S/ MEGAN ROSS HUTCHINS

 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

AND COUNTER-DEFENDANT, DANA WILBER

Dated: MARCH 12, 2008 FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

JOHN H. DOUGLAS

KRISTY KUNISAKI

 /S/ JOHN H. DOUGLAS

_____________________________ 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

AND COUNTER-CLAIMANT, SILGAN CONTAINERS CORPORATION

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATE: 3/18/2008 

______________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:06-cv-02181-MCE -EFB Document 41 Filed 03/18/08 Page 3 of 3