Free Motion to Continue - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-05068-PVT

Document 7

Filed 01/16/2008

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LAW OFFICES RYNN & JANOWSKY 4100 NEWPORT PLACE DRIVE SUITE 700 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660-2423 (949) 752-2911 FAX (949) 752-0953

BART M. BOTTA, State Bar No. 167051 RYNN & JANOWSKY, LLP 4100 Newport Place Drive, Suite 700 Newport Beach, CA 92660-2423 Telephone: (949) 752-2911 Facsimile: (949) 752-0953 E-mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiffs TAYLOR FARMS CALIFORNIA, INC., PISMO-OCEANO VEGETABLE EXCHANGE, and ROBERT S. ANDREWS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

TAYLOR FARMS CALIFORNIA, INC., a corporation; PISMO-OCEANO VEGETABLE EXCHANGE, a corporation; ROBERT S. ANDREWS, individually and doing business as ROBERT S. ANDREWS FARMS, a sole proprietorship,

CASE NO. C07-05068-PVT MOTION TO CONTINUE RULE 26 REPORT AND INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Plaintiffs,

v.
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

REGIONAL SOURCE PRODUCE, INC., a corporation; THOMAS H. BUBNIS, an individual; KIM MARES, an individual, Defendants.

Plaintiffs TAYLOR FARMS CALIFORNIA, INC., a corporation; PISMOOCEANO VEGETABLE EXCHANGE, a corporation; and ROBERT S. ANDREWS,
07-219/Motion to Continue

1

Case 5:07-cv-05068-PVT

Document 7

Filed 01/16/2008

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LAW OFFICES RYNN & JANOWSKY 4100 NEWPORT PLACE DRIVE SUITE 700 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660-2423 (949) 752-2911 FAX (949) 752-0953

individually and doing business as ROBERT S. ANDREWS FARMS, a sole proprietorship ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, respectfully move this Honorable Court for a continuance of the dates set forth in the Court's "Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR Deadlines," and in support thereof states as follows: 1. 2. 3. On October 2, 2007, the Complaint in this case was filed; Defendants were served and their answers were due on November 5, 2007; At about the time the answers were due, attorney John C. Kirke contacted

me and said that he had not been retained yet but that he may be representing the Defendants and we discussed the possibility of stipulating to judgments against Defendants. I spoke to Mr. Kirke one or two times after that initial conversation but he could not commit to the Defendants stipulating to a judgment. 4. On January 15, 2008, I sent a letter to Mr. Kirke informing him that I would

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

take his clients' defaults if answers were not filed. 5. On January 16, 2008, I received a letter from Mr. Kirke informing me that

his clients will file answer this week. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a copy of Mr. Kirke's letter dated January 16, 2008. 6. The ADR Scheduling Order sets the deadline to file the Rule 26(f) Report

as January 15, 2008 and sets the Initial Case Management Conference (CMC) for January 22, 2008; 7. Since Defendants have not appeared and Plaintiffs have not yet entered

their defaults, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court continue the Case Management Conference for approximately 30 to 45 days; 8. Plaintiffs believe that continuing the Case Management Conference for

approximately 30 to 45 days will allow either answers to be filed and the Case Management Conference to go forward with all parties participating, or defaults to be entered and final judgment to be sought, which would be the most efficient use of this Court's time and resources;

07-219/Motion to Continue

2

Case 5:07-cv-05068-PVT

Document 7

Filed 01/16/2008

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LAW OFFICES RYNN & JANOWSKY 4100 NEWPORT PLACE DRIVE SUITE 700 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660-2423 (949) 752-2911 FAX (949) 752-0953

9.

Plaintiffs have not requested any previous extensions of time for any of

these dates, and Plaintiffs believe that the reasons listed herein support good cause for granting the request to continue these dates; 10. The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that this request is not interposed

for purposes of delay. For these reasons, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Honorable Court to continue the Initial Case Management Conference for 30 to 45 days as set forth above. DATED: January 16, 2008 RYNN & JANOWSKY, LLP

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

By:

/s/ Bart M. Botta BART M. BOTTA, Attorneys for Plaintiff

07-219/Motion to Continue

3