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

l Jay M. Mann (No. 005823)
Robert J. Berens (No. 012056)
2 Hank E. Pearson (No. 014593)
MANN, BERENS & WISNER, LLP
3 2929 North Central Avenue, Suite 1600
Phoenix, Arizona 85012
4 (602) 258-6200
Email: jn1an11g£Dmbwlaw.com
5 rberensg¢})mbwlaw.com
hpearsongdlmbwlawxom
6 Attorneys for Use-Plaintiff
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
9 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR
10 THE BENEFIT AND USE OF EPC C N CIV O2 2313 PHX ROS (LEAD
- - ase 0. -
H CORPORATION, an Arizona corporation, CIV 03431 PHX ROS
CIV 04-1360 PHX ROS
12 Use-Plaintiff,
(Consolidated)
13 vs.
14 STIPULATED MOTION RE
TRAVELERS CASUALTY & SURETY EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY
15 COMPANY or AMERICA; et 111., DEADLINE
16 Defendants.
17
18
19 The parties hereby stipulate and agree and jointly move the Court as follows:
20 1. On or about May 3, 2005, the parties to this action stipulated and jointly
21 moved the Court that they be permitted to tile "cross motions for partial summary
22
23 judgment on the issue of whether backcharges may or may not be asserted due to a
24 termination for convenience and for partial summary judgment on the validity of Plaintiff
25 EPC Corporation’s (‘EPC’s’) request for equitable adjustment," as well as a Motion by
26 Travelers regarding Standard Construction’s compliance with Miller Act notice
27
28 provisions." (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Motions")
so 2:02-cv—O2313-ROS Document 124 ‘1FiIod O9/O9/2005 Page 1 of 3

I 2. The purpose of the stay of discovery was to determine whether certain
2 deposition discovery would be necessary and to permit the Court to trim from the case
if issues that could be decided as a matter of law so as to streamline remaining discovery
5 prior to trial.
6 3. The Court agreed with the proposal and permitted the filing of the Motions.
7 4. The Court also stayed discovery for six months through November 7, 2005;
; 5. The various Motions for Summary Judgment filed by the parties are now
10 fully briefed and pending before the Court;
11 6. No date for oral argument has been set and no decision has been rendered
‘2 bythe com
Ii 7. To effectuate the intent of the earlier Stipulation, the parties believe that it
15 is necessary to continue the stay of discovery until the Court decides the Motions. As
16 such, the parties hereby jointly request that the discovery deadline be extended to a date
17 120 days after the date when the Court renders its decision on the Motions.
1; DATED this 9m day of September, 2005.
20 MANN, BERENS & WISNER, L.L.P. I
22 Jay M.& ann
23 Robert J. Berens
Hank E. Pearson
24 Attorneys for Use-Plaintiff
25
26 ///
27 111
28
se 2:O2—cv—O2313—ROS Document 124 ‘2FiIed O9/O9/2005 Page 2 of 3

I GAONA LAW FIRM
2
3 M ` |¤.»-in-
David . Gaona
4 Attorney for Plaintiff Standard Construction
5
SNELL & WILMER, L.L.P.
6
7 • W •·-·-·-n.
g TroyEArarnburu Z
Attorneys for Beneco Enterprises, L.L.C.
9
10 JENNINGS HAUG & CUNNINGHAM, LLP
ll
12 By é
13 James . Csontos, Esq.
Attorneys for Defendant Travelers
14
15 Original of the foregoing electronically tiled
16 and copy delivered this 9th day of
17 September, 2005, to:
18 Honorable Roslyn O. Silver
United States District Court
19 Sandra Day O’Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 624
20 401 West Washington Street, SPC 59
Phoeni AZ 85003-2158
21 ---— »· 7, `
22 °| ` C i {A2 .;{}II 9 ~r--.·
104-8
23
24
25
26
27
28
• se 2:02-cv—O2313—ROS Document 124 ‘3FiIed O9/O9/2005 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 124

Filed 09/09/2005

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 124

Filed 09/09/2005

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 124

Filed 09/09/2005

Page 3 of 3