Soto v. County of Sacramento ( 2021 )

1 LONGYEAR & LAVRA, LLP Van Longyear, CSB No.: 84189 2 Nicole M. Cahill, CSB No.: 287165 3620 American River Drive, Suite 230 3 Sacramento, CA 95864 Phone: 916-974-8500 4 Facsimile: 916-974-8510 5 Attorneys for Defendants, County of Sacramento, Deputy Blake Grinder, 6 Deputy Kenneth Lloyd, Deputy John Higley, Deputy Andrew Garside, Sgt. Kelley Bunn, 7 Sgt. Gregory Johnson, Sgt. Charles Gailey and Sheriff Scott Jones 8 Jeremy I. Lessem, Esq. SBN: 213406 9 Lessem, Newstat & Tooson, LLP 3450 Cahuenga Blvd W., Ste 102 10 Los Angeles, CA 90068 T: 818-582-3087 11 F: 818-484-3087 12 Karen C. Joynt, SBN 206332 Law Office of Karen Joynt 13 222 S. Lake Ave., Ste. 300 Pasadena, CA 91101 14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 15 XAVIER BECERRA, State Bar No. 118517 16 Attorney General of California ALBERTO L. GONZALEZ, State Bar No. 117605 17 Supervising Deputy Attorney General MATTHEW W. ROMAN, State Bar No. 267717 18 Deputy Attorney General JOHN C. BRIDGES, State Bar No. 248553 19 Deputy Attorney General 1300 I Street, Suite 125 20 P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 21 Telephone: (916)210-7529 Fax: (916)322-8288 22 Attorneys for Defendant California Highway Patrol 23 Officer Greg White 24 PORTER SCOTT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 25 Carl L. Fessenden, SBN 161494 Suli A. Mastorakos, SBN 330383 26 350 University Ave., Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95825 27 TEL: 916.929.1481 FAX: 916.927.3706 28 Attorneys for Defendant Patricia Robinson-Hard 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION 3 4 SILVIA SOTO, an individual, LATANYA ) Case No.: 2:19-cv-00910-TLN-DB ANDREWS, an individual, MARCELO M.S., ) 5 minor, and MARLENIE M.S., a minor, by and ) STIPULATED REQUEST TO MODIFY through their guardian ad litem, SILVIA ) SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND 6 SOTO, in each case both individually and as ) DEADLINES FOR FACT DISCOVERY successors-in-interest to the ESTATE OF ) CUT OFF AND ORDER 7 MARSHALL MILES, Deceased, ) ) 8 Plaintiffs ) ) 9 v. ) ) 10 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, BLAKE ) GRINDER, KENNETH LLOYD, JOHN ) 11 HIGLEY, ISRAEL HERNANDEZ, FNU ) JENNINGS, ANDREW GARSIDE, GREG ) 12 WHITE, KELLEY BUNN, CHARLES ) GAILEY, SCOTT JONES and DOES 1 ) 13 through 100, inclusive, ) ) 14 Defendants. ) ) 15 Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16(b)(1)(A) and Local Rule 143, the parties, 16 through counsel, stipulate to and hereby request a modification of this Court’s scheduling order. 17 Pursuant to the Court’s Initial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 4), the current schedule is as follows: 18  Fact discovery cut off: January 8, 2021 19  Expert witness disclosure: March 9, 2021 20  Supplemental expert disclosure: April 8, 2021 21  Dispositive motion deadline: July 7, 2021 22 The parties in this case request an extension only as to the fact discovery cut off. The parties 23 request that the current deadline of January 8, 20201 be extended until February 5, 2021. No other 24 modifications are sought at this time. The parties request all other deadlines remain in effect. 25 A scheduling order may only be modified upon a showing of good cause and by leave of 26 Court. Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 6(b)(1)(A); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 27 (9th Cir. 1992). In considering whether a party moving for a schedule modification has good 28 1 cause, the Court primarily focuses on the diligence of the party seeking the modification. Johnson, 2 975 F.2d at 609. 3 The parties have worked diligently in litigating this matter. The parties have conducted 4 numerous depositions in addition to multiple sets of written discovery. Plaintiffs served a Rule 5 30(b)(6) deposition notice to Defendant County of Sacramento on December 2, 2020 seeking a 6 deponent to testify as to a range of topics, including policy revision procedures and specific 7 training in six categories received by six of the County’s employees. The parties also attended a 8 mediation on December 16, 2020. Due to the holidays, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the 9 intervening mediation, and the availability of witnesses and counsel, the parties agree to and 10 request the Court order an extension of fact discovery. The extension would allow the Rule 11 30(b)(6) depositions to move forward and any additional discovery that may be required. The 12 parties have not previously sought a modification of the scheduling order and the requested 13 extension will not affect any other deadline in the Court’s scheduling order. 14 For these reasons, good cause exists to modify the fact discovery cut off deadline. The 15 parties therefore agree and request the fact discovery cut off be extended to February 5, 2021. 16 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 17 Dated: December 30, 2020 LONGYEAR & LAVRA, LLP 18 By: /s/ Nicole M. Cahill 19 VAN LONGYEAR NICOLE M. CAHILL 20 Attorneys for Defendants, County of Sacramento, Deputy Blake Grinder, 21 Deputy Kenneth Lloyd, Deputy John Higley, Deputy Israel Hernandez, Deputy Jacqueline 22 Jennings, Deputy Andrew Garside, Sgt. Kelley Bunn, Sgt. Charles Gailey and Sheriff Scott Jones 23 Dated: December 30, 2020 LESSEM, NEWSTAT & TOOSON, LLP 24 25 By: /s/ Jeremy I. Lessem JEREMY I. LESSEM 26 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 Dated: December 30, 2020 LAW OFFICE OF KAREN JOYNT 2 By: /s/Karen Joynt 3 KAREN JOYNT Attorneys for Plaintiffs 4 Dated: December 30, 2020 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 5 6 By: /s/Matthew W. Roman JOHN C. BRIDGES 7 MATTHEW W. ROMAN Attorneys for defendant 8 Officer White 9 Dated: December 30, 2020 PORTER SCOTT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 10 11 By: /s/ Carl L. Fessenden CARL L. FESSENDEN 12 SULI A. MASTORAKOS Attorneys for Defendant 13 Patricia Robinson-Hard 14 15 16 17 18 ORDER 19 Good cause appearing, the parties’ stipulated request to modify the Court’s Scheduling 20 Order (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. 21 The parties may conduct discovery until February 5, 2021. All other deadlines remain in 22 effect. 23 DATED: December 30, 2020 24 25 26 27 28