Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01505/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01505-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jerry W. Neufeld, Jr.
Plaintiff
Winco Foods
Defendant
Winco Holdings, Inc.
Defendant

Document Text:

1

24861913v.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

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

Kristina M. Launey (SBN 221335)

klauney@seyfarth.com

Michael W. Kopp (SBN 206385)

mkopp@seyfarth.com

400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350

Sacramento, California 95814-4428

Telephone: (916) 448-0159

Facsimile: (916) 558-4839

Attorneys for Defendant

WINCO HOLDINGS, INC., sued herein as “WinCo

Holdings, Inc. dba WinCo Foods”

LAW OFFICES OF MICHELLE IARUSSO

Michelle Iarusso (SBN 280483)

michelle@mipilaw.com

Nicholas Dagher (SBN 275776)

64 N. Fair Oaks Avenue

Pasadena, CA 91103

Sacramento, California 95814-4428

Telephone: (626) 415-4422 

Facsimile: (916) 558-4839

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Jerry W. Neufeld, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERRY W. NEUFELD, JR., an individual,

Plaintiff,

v.

WINCO HOLDINGS, INC. dba WINCO FOODS, 

an Idaho corporation; and DOES 1 to 100, 

inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No.: 1:14-CV-01505-DAD-JLT

JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE EXPERT 

DISCOVERY CUTOFF AND PRETRIAL 

AND TRIAL DEADLINES; ORDER

Trial Date: June 28, 2016

Complaint Filed: July 28, 2014

Case 1:14-cv-01505-DAD-JLT Document 29 Filed 02/29/16 Page 1 of 5
2

24861913v.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

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE DROZD:

WinCo Holdings, Inc. (“Defendant”) and Jerry W. Neufeld (“Plaintiff”) through their counsel of 

record jointly move for (1) a continuance of the expert discovery deadline, and (2) a continuance of the 

current trial and pretrial filing deadlines, pending the outcome of WinCo’s pending motion for summary 

judgment. 

The parties requested and the Court previously granted extensions of the expert, pre-trial, and 

trial deadlines by order dated December 22, 2015 (Dkt. No. 23), in order to allow the Court to rule first 

on WinCo’s pending Motion for Summary Judgment, before requiring potentially unnecessary expert 

discovery and pre-trial filings. See id. at pp. 2-4. WinCo’s Motion for Summary Judgment remains 

pending, and the same concerns of judicial economy and avoidance of potentially unnecessary litigation 

weigh in favor of allowing the Court to rule first on the summary judgment motion, prior to requiring 

further expert discovery and pretrial filings. 

Consistent with the parties’ prior stipulation and this Court’s prior order, the parties accordingly 

seek an extension of the expert, pretrial and trial deadlines, pending the Court’s ruling on WinCo’s 

pending motion for summary judgment. In support of this Motion, the parties provide the following 

procedural background:

1. This matter was removed to the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California on 

September 25, 2014. This Court issued a scheduling order on February 20, 2015, following the 

February 19, 2015 status conference.

2. The parties promptly complied with this initial scheduling order, including completing all 

non-expert discovery by September 18, 2015. In addition, Defendant timely filed its “Motion for 

Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, Motion for Summary Adjudication” on October 21, 2015, in 

compliance with the original scheduling order.

3. WinCo’s Motion for Summary Judgment was noticed for hearing for December 4, 2015, 

in advance of the original expert discovery cutoff and pretrial filing deadlines. WinCo’s motion for 

summary judgment is potentially dispositive of all of Plaintiff’s claims. Plaintiff filed his Opposition on 

November 20, 2015, and WinCo filed its Reply on November 25, 2015.

Case 1:14-cv-01505-DAD-JLT Document 29 Filed 02/29/16 Page 2 of 5
3

24861913v.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

4. By order dated December 1, 2015 (Dkt. No. 21), the Court reset the hearing on 

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment for January 15, 2016, which would have occurred after the 

original expert discovery cutoff. 

5. In order to avoid burdening the Court and the parties with the potentially unnecessary 

expense and burden of (1) expert discovery motion practice, (2) the depositions of Plaintiff’s retained 

and non-retained experts, and (3) extensive pretrial filings, on December 14, 2015, the parties filed a 

joint motion to extend the expert and pre-trial deadlines by approximately 2 1/2 months, from December 

26, 2015, to March 15, 2016, to allow for a ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment. (Dkt. No. 22.). 

6. By order dated December 22, 2015 (Dkt. No. 23), the Court granted the parties’ 

stipulation, which extended the expert and pretrial deadlines to allow the Court to rule first on WinCo’s 

pending Motion for Summary Judgment. Id.

7. WinCo’s Motion for Summary Judgment was argued before Judge Mueller on January 

15, 2016, and remains pending with the Court. The action was reassigned from Judge Mueller to Judge 

Drozd on February 18, 2016. (Dkt. No. 26.) Because the Motion for Summary Judgment remains 

pending before the Court, the same concerns of judicial economy and avoiding potentially unnecessary 

expert discovery and pretrial filings apply. The parties wish to avoid those expenses and filings pending 

the outcome of WinCo’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

8. The Parties have met and conferred and have agreed to request that this Court (1) extend 

the expert discovery cutoff deadline from March 15, 2016 to June 16, 2016; and (2) reset the current 

trial date to a date of the Court’s convenience in September or October 2016, with a corresponding 

adjustment of all pretrial deadlines (including the joint pretrial statement deadline, pretrial conference 

date, and the trial brief deadline).

///

///

///

///

///

Case 1:14-cv-01505-DAD-JLT Document 29 Filed 02/29/16 Page 3 of 5
4

24861913v.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

9. Only one prior scheduling extension was sought in this matter as to any scheduling 

deadline (discussed at para. 5 above), and the proposed three-month extensions on the current expert 

discovery and trial and pretrial deadlines are sought in good faith and for purpose of judicial economy, 

pending the outcome of WinCo’s Motion for Summary Judgement.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

DATED: February 26, 2016 Respectfully submitted,

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

By: /s/ Michael W. Kopp

Kristina M. Launey

Michael W. Kopp

Attorneys for Defendant

WINCO HOLDINGS, INC.

DATED: February 26, 2016 LAW OFFICES OF MICHELLE IARUSSO

By: /s/ Michelle Iarusso

Michelle Iarusso

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JERRY NEUFELD 

Attorney for Plaintiff agreed with the contents of 

this document and authorized the filer to use her 

electronic signature

Case 1:14-cv-01505-DAD-JLT Document 29 Filed 02/29/16 Page 4 of 5
5

24861913v.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

The Court hereby orders:

(a) the deadline for the parties is continued to complete expert discovery to June 16, 2016.

(b) the trial date is continued from June 28, 2016, to September 27, 2016, at 8:30am.

(c) the deadline to file the joint pretrial statement is continued to July 25, 2016.

(d) the pretrial conference is reset to August 1, 2016, at 1:30 pm.

(e) the deadline to submit trial briefs is continued to September 13, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 29, 2016 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01505-DAD-JLT Document 29 Filed 02/29/16 Page 5 of 5