Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

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

Robert Hardy Falk, (TX 06795300, pro hac vice) Robert Hardy Falk, P.C. Post Office Box 794748 Dallas, TX 75379 Tel.: (214) 954 4400 Fax.: (214) 969 5941 Attorney for Plaintiff Brian Holohan (009124) [email protected] Darrell S. Dudzik (016465) [email protected] Hinshaw & Culbertson L.L.P. 3800 North Central Ave. Suite 1600 Phoenix, AZ 85012 Tel.: (602) 631-4400 Fax.: (602) 631 4404 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Thomas G. Watkins, III, an ) individual; Skyline ) Manufacturing, Inc., an Arizona ) corporation, ) ) Defendants. ) ) Ronald Craig Fish, a law corporation, a California corporation,

No. CIV-03-67-PHX-SMM JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND THE RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER

The Plaintiff and Defendants jointly, move this Court to extend the Rule 16 Scheduling Order in this matter. In support thereof the parties state as follows: At the time of the first extension of times, the parties had been in negotiations for about two months over the

creation of an agreed two-tier Protective Order addressing the

Case 2:03-cv-00067-SMM

Document 98

Filed 09/23/2005

Page 1 of 4

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

disclosure

of

the various

documents

which

are the

subject

matter of this controversy. A two-tier Protective Order was submitted to the Court for approval and signed by the Court. Since that time, additional documents have been exchanged

between the parties, but a few issues concerning documents not produced and the attorney-client privilege have arisen which counsel are working towards resolving. Counsel are working to

resolve all production issues and scope of deposition issues amicably to avoid motions compel, or at least to narrow them. The close of discovery is scheduled for October 14, 2005, which date presents multiple problems as one of the parties is a lawyer with a litigation docket and there are third party Rule 45 depositions which need to be taken out-of-state in California. Two depositions pertaining to the Defendants are

to be taken in Arizona, as well as the deposition of Mr. Fish, which Plaintiff currently desires in Phoenix. Mr. Fish is lead counsel for a plaintiff in a patent infringement case in the Central District of California and has obligations to respond to a summary judgment motion against his client, which

response is due October 3, 2005.

Additionally, depositions in

that case requiring his presence are scheduled for October 4, 5 and 7. To make matters even worse, Plaintiff is having new counsel enter the case, or at least to assist the undersigned in the depositions, finishing up paper discovery, attending the pretrial conference or helping in trial preparation. His long-scheduled vacation ends October 10, 2005. That counsel 2
Case 2:03-cv-00067-SMM Document 98 Filed 09/23/2005 Page 2 of 4

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

has

just

filed

a

motion

for

pro

hac

vice.

Counsel

for

plaintiff has certain vacation plans which interrupt a heavy schedule. Accordingly, a second extension is requested for all

dates of at least about nine weeks. The parties jointly move, not for the purposes of delay but to narrow the issues,

resolve same amicably and move this litigation towards trial now move the Court to extend the deadlines as follows:
a.

That Plaintiff shall disclose the identity of any

person who may be used at trial to present evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 701, 702, 703, 704, and 705 no later than November 25, 2005.
b.

That Defendants shall disclose the identity of any

person who may be used at trial to present evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 701, 702, 703 ,704, and 705 no later than January 6, 2006.
c.

Rebuttal experts, if any, shall be disclosed no later

than January 27, 2006.
d.

The deposition of all parties, witnesses and experts,

answers to interrogatories and supplements to interrogatories must be completed by November 25, 2005.
e.

All expert discovery is to be completed by February

3, 2006.
f.

All dispositive motions must be filed by March 31,

2006.

3
Case 2:03-cv-00067-SMM Document 98 Filed 09/23/2005 Page 3 of 4

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

The parties further request the Court schedule a Pretrial Conference or Status Hearing consistent with its order. DATED this 23rd day of September, 2005. ROBERT HARDY FALK, P.C.

By

/s/ Robert Hardy Falk Robert Hardy Falk Attorneys for Plaintiff

HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP

By /s/ Darrell S. Dudzik Brian Holohan Darrell S. Dudzik Attorneys for Defendants

4
Case 2:03-cv-00067-SMM Document 98 Filed 09/23/2005 Page 4 of 23018490v1 4
827165