Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00887/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00887-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Manuel Andrade
Defendant
County of San Joaquin
Defendant
Jonathan Earl Danner
Plaintiff

Document Text:

_____________________________________________

Joint Objection To The Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order; Stipulation And Proposed Order For Modification Of The 

Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order.

Page 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

29

30

MAYALL HURLEY, P.C.

A Professional Corporation

2453 Grand Canal Boulevard, Second Floor

Stockton, California 95207-8253

Telephone (209) 477-3833

MARK E. BERRY, ESQ.

CA State Bar No. 155091

DERICK KONZ, ESQ

CA State Bar No. 286902

Attorneys for Defendants,

COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN and 

MANUEL ANDRADE

THE LAW OFFICE OF YOUSEF J. TOTAH

YOUSEF J. TOTAH, ESQ. (SBN: 296759)

951 Mariners Island Blvd., Suite 300

San Mateo, California 94404

Telephone: (650) 378-1290

Facsimile: (650) 378-1291

E-mail: y.totah@yousefjtotahlaw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff,

JONATHAN EARL DANNER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN EARL DANNER,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

THE COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, and 

MANUEL ANDRADE,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 2:15-cv-00887-MCE-EFB 

JOINT OBJECTION TO THE INITIAL 

PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

FOR MODIFICATION OF THE INITIAL 

PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER.

Pursuant to Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., rule 16(b)(4), by stipulation of all parties, and good 

cause showing therefor, Defendants COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN and MANUEL ANDRADE 

Case 2:15-cv-00887-JAM-JDP Document 26 Filed 05/17/16 Page 1 of 3
_____________________________________________

Joint Objection To The Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order; Stipulation And Proposed Order For Modification Of The 

Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order.

Page 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

29

30

(collectively hereinafter “Defendants”) and Plaintiff JONATHAN DANNER hereby move this 

Court to modify the Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 24.) 

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On April 24, 2015, Plaintiff filed his original Complaint in this matter. (ECF No. 1.)

On August 18, 2015, Defendants COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN and MANUEL 

ANDRADE filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., rule 

12(b)(6). (ECF No. 13.) 

On December 2, 2015, the court GRANTED in part and DENIED in part Defendants’ 

motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 18.)

On December 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 19.)

On January 11, 2016, Defendants filed Answers to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. 

(ECF Nos. 20, 21.)

On May 4, 2016, the Court issued a Pretrial Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 24.) The 

Pretrial Scheduling Order required, “[a]ll discovery, with the exception of expert discovery, 

shall be completed no later than three hundred sixty−five (365) days from the filing of the 

original complaint in the action.” (ECF No. 24, 2:18-20.)

II. STIPULATION AND STATEMENT OF GOOD CAUSE

Good cause exists to modify the Pretrial Scheduling Order. 

As the scheduling order currently directs, discovery is to be completed by April 24, 2016 

(“365 days from the filing of the original complaint”). This date has already passed and already 

passed when the court issued the May 4, 2016 Pretrial Scheduling Order. Neither party has 

conducted discovery yet.

The parties hereby stipulate and request that the Court modify the Pretrial Scheduling 

Order such that the non-expert discovery cut-off date be set to three hundred sixty-five (365) 

days from the December 21, 2015 filing of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. Accordingly, 

the new proposed non-expert discovery cut-off date would be December 21, 2016. All other 

Case 2:15-cv-00887-JAM-JDP Document 26 Filed 05/17/16 Page 2 of 3
_____________________________________________

Joint Objection To The Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order; Stipulation And Proposed Order For Modification Of The 

Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order.

Page 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

29

30

timelines in the Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Order would remain the same, as they are 

conditioned on occurring within a set number of days after the non-expert discovery cut-off date.

Defendants and Plaintiff, by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and 

agree to the foregoing modification of the Scheduling Order.

DATED: May 13, 2016 MAYALL HURLEY, P.C.

/s/ Mark E. Berry

By____________________________________________

MARK E. BERRY, Esq.

Attorney for Defendants, COUNT OF SAN 

JOAQUIN and MANUEL ANDRADE

DATED: May 13, 2016 THE LAW OFFICE OF YOUSEF J. TOTAH

/s/ Yousef J. Totah (as authorized on 5/13/16)

By________________________ __________________ 

YOUSEF J. TOTAH, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff, JONATHAN DANNER

ORDER

By stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefor, the Court hereby Orders 

that the Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 24) is modified as follows:

All discovery in this action, with the exception of expert discovery, shall be 

completed no later than December 21, 2016. The previous date of April 24, 2016 is hereby 

vacated.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 16, 2016

Case 2:15-cv-00887-JAM-JDP Document 26 Filed 05/17/16 Page 3 of 3