IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHEASTERN BOLL WEEVIL * 

ERADICATION FOUNDATION, * 

 * 

 Plaintiff, * 

 * 

 VS. * Civil Action No. 2:06-CV-00756 

 * 

BOLL WEEVIL ERADICATION * 

FOUNDATION OF GEORGIA, INC.; * 

TOMMY IRVIN in his capacity as * 

TRUSTEE OF BOLL WEEVIL * 

ERADICATION FOUNDATION OF * 

GEORGIA, INC., * 

 * 

 Defendants. * 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR FILING 

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

 COMES NOW, Defendant, Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation of Georgia, Inc. 

in the above-captioned case, and respectfully moves this Court to extend the time in 

which the parties may file dispositive motions as established in this Court’s October 20, 

2006 Scheduling Order as follows: 

1. 

 On or about October 19, 2006, the parties submitted their discovery plan as 

required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f). 

2. 

 Subsequently, this Court conducted a scheduling conference and, pursuant to 

Fed.R.Civ.P. 16, entered a Scheduling Order establishing, among others, the deadline for 

the parties to file dispositive motions, which was established at ninety (90) days before 

the pretrial conference set for October 15, 2007. Thus, pursuant to the October 2006 

Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 36 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 1 of 7
Scheduling Order, dispositive motions must be filed by the parties on or before July 15, 

2007. For reasons enumerated infra, the Defendant moves this Court for an extension of 

this deadline. Counsel for Defendant has contacted Mr. Mitch Henry, counsel for 

Plaintiff Southeastern Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation, and he does not object to this 

motion or the extension. 

3. 

 On October 27, 2006, Plaintiff served on Defendant its First Continuing 

Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. On November 25, 2006, 

Defendant responded to Plaintiff's First Interrogatories and First Request For Production 

of documents producing two hundred sixty-five (265) documents to Plaintiff. 

Subsequently, Defendant supplemented its responses to Plaintiff's First Request for 

Production of Documents on January 25, 2007 by producing an additional nine hundred 

seventy (970) documents to Plaintiff. In addition, on May 7, 2007, Defendant further 

supplemented its responses to Plaintiff's First Request for Production of Documents by 

producing nine hundred thirty-three (933) documents to Plaintiff. Thus, in total, 

Defendant has produced two thousand one hundred sixty-eight (2,168) documents to 

Plaintiff. 

4. 

 On January 4, 2007, Defendant served on Plaintiff its First Continuing 

Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Due to the volume of 

documents requested by Plaintiff, the parties jointly agreed to an extension of time for 

Plaintiff to respond to Defendant’s discovery. On April 2, 2007, Plaintiff responded to 

Defendant’s discovery producing one thousand six hundred twenty-four (1,624) 

Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 36 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 2 of 7
documents to Defendant. On April 20, 2007, Defendant served its supplemental 

Interrogatories and Request for Production on Plaintiff. Defendant has granted Plaintiff 

an extension of time to respond to the supplemental discovery. However, Defendant 

anticipates that Plaintiff will produce several hundred more documents in response to 

Defendant’s supplemental request. 

5. 

 Following the initial exchange of documents, Plaintiff noticed the depositions of 

four (4) of Defendant's Board members, Billy Sanders, Herbert Price, Mike Evans, and 

Jim Wilson. These depositions were scheduled to take place over a two day period. 

However, the deposition of Billy Sanders took an entire day, and therefore, Plaintiff was 

only able to take Mr. Sanders, Mr. Price, and Mr. Evans' depositions in the allotted two 

day period. Mr. Wilson's deposition has been rescheduled for Monday, June 25, 2007. 

In addition, as a result of subsequent documents produced to Plaintiff by Mr. Sanders and 

Mr. Evans, Plaintiff will reconvene the depositions of Mr. Sanders, Mr. Price, and Mr. 

Evans on Monday, July 9, 2007 and Tuesday, July 10, 2007. Plaintiff will depose five 

(5) other witnesses for Defendant on Wednesday, July 11, 2007, Thursday, July 12, 2007, 

and Friday, July 13, 2007. 

6. 

 Plaintiff anticipates that it may have to take additional depositions over and above 

the nine (9) depositions that will have been taken by Plaintiff as of Friday, July 13, 2007. 

7. 

 For its part, Defendant has scheduled and is in the process of scheduling the 

depositions of fourteen (14) members and representatives of Plaintiff. Defendant will 

Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 36 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 3 of 7
also schedule Plaintiff’s deposition pursuant to a Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) Notice. The 

proposed deponents reside in various states including North Carolina, South Carolina, 

Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee, thus, posing various logistical 

and practical issues relative to the scheduling of those depositions. 

8. 

 Another key issue in scheduling the depositions of the various witnesses is the 

fact that most of them are cotton farmers. At present, given the severe drought conditions 

across the Southeast, many of these farmers are operating on a deadline with respect to 

when they must replant the cotton that has burned up in the fields, due to the lack of rain, 

for insurance purposes. Clearly, this consideration, which directly affects these 

individuals' personal livelihoods, is foremost on their mind and of utmost concern for 

them. Unfortunately, this drought condition has greatly affected the scheduling of 

depositions for both Plaintiff and Defendant. 

9. 

 Defendant anticipates that several more depositions in addition to those 

referenced above will be taken including individuals who work for the United States 

Department of Agriculture. However, pursuant to this Court’s Rule 16 Scheduling Order, 

dispositive motions are due to this Court by July 15, 2007. Defendant does not anticipate 

that of the depositions referenced above will be completed and received in sufficient time 

to prepare and file dispositive motions. 

Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 36 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 4 of 7
10. 

 Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, the purpose of summary judgment is to narrow the 

issues for trial, promote judicial economy, and determine which, if any, of the relevant 

facts of the case are agreed upon by the parties. See generally Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 

477 U.S. 317 (1986). At this point in the discovery process, the parties are in no position 

to determine the relevant scope of facts for this case or the "universe" of documents that 

the parties will present to support their summary judgment motions. Any motion for 

summary judgment would be, at this point, extremely premature toward furthering the 

ultimate goal of narrowing the issues for trial. 

11. 

 Therefore, because of the amount of discovery yet to be completed by the parties, 

and the fact that the parties will not be in a position to file dispositive motions by the 

deadline as established by this Court, Defendant moves this Court to extend the deadline 

to file dispositive motions as established in this Court’s Rule 16 Scheduling Order as 

follows: 

 (1) All dispositive motions should be filed with the court no later than sixty 

 (60) days before the October 15, 2007 pre-trial conference; 

 (2) All other dates and stipulations from the parties’ Rule 26(f) Discovery 

 Plan and this Court’s October 20, 2006 Scheduling Order are to remain the 

 same. 

 

Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 36 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 5 of 7
 WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully moves this Court to extend the deadline to 

file dispositive motions as indicated above. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 This the 22nd day of June, 2007. 

 

 /s/ Duke R. Groover 

 DUKE R. GROOVER 

 Georgia Bar No.: 313225 

 /s/ G. Grant Greenwood 

 G. GRANT GREENWOOD 

 Georgia Bar No.: 309166 

JAMES, BATES, POPE & SPIVEY, LLP 

Post Office Box 4283 

Macon, Georgia 31208-4283 

Telephone: (478)742-4280 

Facsimile: (478)742-8720 

 

 /s/ Simeon F. Penton 

 SIMEON FRANKLIN PENTON 

 Alabama Bar No.: PEN007 

KAUFMAN & ROTHFELDER, P.C. 

Post Office Drawer 4540 

Montgomery, Alabama 36102 

Telephone: (334)244-1111 

Facsimile: (334)244-1969 

 Attorneys for Boll Weevil Eradication 

 Foundation of Georgia, Inc. 

Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 36 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 6 of 7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that I have this day served a copy of the foregoing on all parties 

via electronic service. 

 This 22nd day of June, 2007. 

 /s/ Duke R. Groover 

 DUKE R. GROOVER 

 Georgia Bar No.: 313225 

JAMES, BATES, POPE & SPIVEY, LLP 

Post Office Box 4283 

Macon, Georgia 31208-4283 

Telephone: (478)742-4280 

Facsimile: (478)742-8720 

Case 2:06-cv-00756-MHT-WC Document 36 Filed 06/22/2007 Page 7 of 7