1 Michael F. Ram, SBN 104805 Fletcher C. Alford, SBN 152314 [email protected] [email protected] 2 Marie N. Appel, SBN 187483 Kevin Liu, SBN 295287 [email protected] [email protected] 3 Colin Losey, SBN 352223 Myles Lanzone, SBN 257791 [email protected] [email protected] 4 MORGAN & MORGAN GORDON REES SCULLY COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP MANSUKHANI, LLP 5 711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500 315 Pacific Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 San Francisco, California 94111 6 Telephone: (415) 846-3862 Telephone: (415) 986-5900 Facsimile: (415) 358-6923 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 7 Jeffrey B. Cereghino, SBN 99480 Attorneys for Defendant 8 [email protected] THE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, CEREGHINO LAW GROUP LLP INC., dba THE MANAGEMENT TRUST 9 737 Bryant Street San Francisco, CA 94105 10 Telephone: (415) 433-4949 Facsimile: (415) 433-7311 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Putative 12 Class

13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15 RIVA ON THE RIVER HOMEOWNERS’ No. 2:24-cv-02782-CSK 16 ASSOCIATION on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, 17 STIPULATION AND MODIFIED Plaintiff, [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING 18 SCHEDULING ORDER DATES v. 19 Hon. Chi Soo Kim THE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, 20 INC. dba THE MANAGEMENT TRUST, a Action Filed: October 9, 2024 21 California Corporation,

22 Defendant. 23 24 25 26 27 0 1 Pursuant to Rule 6(b) and 16(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as well as 2 L.R. 143, and 144 of the E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Plaintiff, RIVA ON THE RIVER 3 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION (“RIVA”), and Defendant, THE MANAGEMENT 4 ASSOCIATION, INC. dba THE MANAGEMENT TRUST (“TMT”), jointly stipulate to extend 5 the dates in the Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Order (Dkt. 19) for 120 days to allow time for the 6 parties to conduct sufficient discovery prior to the briefing relating to Plaintiff’s motion for class 7 certification, and the parties seek entry of the same by the Court as set forth below: 8 1. Under Rule 6(b)(1)(A), the Court may extend deadlines for good cause. Fed. R. 9 Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A). Per L.R. 144(d), “[c]ounsel shall seek to obtain a necessary extension from 10 the Court or from other counsel or parties in an action as soon as the need for an extension 11 becomes apparent.” Rule 16(b)(4) states that, “[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause 12 and with the judge's consent.” “Good cause” under Rule 16(b) “primarily considers the diligence 13 of the party seeking the amendment.” Pizana v. SanMedica Int'l LLC,

, 477 (E.D.

) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1992)).

15 To demonstrate diligence under Rule 16’s “good cause” standard, the movant may 16 be required to show the following: (1) that she was diligent in assisting the Court in creating a workable Rule 16 order; (2) that her noncompliance with a Rule 16 17 deadline occurred or will occur, notwithstanding her diligent efforts to comply, because of the development of matters which could not have been reasonably 18 foreseen or anticipated at the time of the Rule 16 scheduling conference; and (3) that she was diligent in seeking amendment of the Rule 16 order, once it became 19 apparent that she could not comply with the order. 20 Id. at 478 (citations omitted). 21 2. The parties were diligent in assisting the Court to create the current pretrial 22 schedule. 23 3. The parties have also been diligently attempting to comply with the Court’s 24 Pretrial Scheduling order by conducting discovery in this case. The parties have each served, 25 and responded to written discovery requests. On May 7, 2025, RIVA produced 114 documents 26 (approximately 5,350 pages total). On June 12, 2025, TMT produced twelve documents 27 1 (approximately 78 pages total), and has approximately 6,000 documents (approximately 39,491 2 pages total) that has been processed for production by its E-Discovery vendor which will be 3 produced this week. TMT had some insurance and technical related issues that delayed 4 commencement of its production. These issues have been resolved, thus its document production 5 should now be able to proceed. Thus far, six depositions have been noticed for later this month, 6 and two third party subpoenas have been issued. 7 4. RIVA has been waiting to notice depositions, in particular those under Rule 8 30(b)(6), until it received documents from TMT to inform the topics, as well as the specific 9 deponents for Rule 30(b)(1) depositions. In light of the recent and anticipated document 10 productions, RIVA recently noticed one deposition for late July and anticipates noticing 11 additional depositions for later in August upon review of documents produced by TMT. 12 5. Notwithstanding the parties’ diligence in pursuing discovery, because of the later 13 start of document production, the current September 5, 2025 deadline for RIVA’s class 14 certification motion does not allow sufficient time for RIVA to receive documents responsive to 15 its requests, review and analyze those documents, conduct depositions based on information in 16 those documents, and assimilate this information sufficiently for its class certification motion. 17 6. The delays caused by problems with the document production could not have been 18 reasonable foreseen or anticipated at the time of the January 28, 2025, scheduling conference 19 before the Court. In particular, TMT experienced insurance-related difficulties and delays in 20 retaining its E-Discovery vendor which were not resolved until the end of May 2025. As such, 21 TMT was unable to meet with, and upload ESI to the E-Discovery vendor until June 2025, a 22 process that is still ongoing, but expected to be completed by the end of July 2025.- 23 7. The parties have been diligent in seeking this modification. Under the operative 24 schedule, fact discovery is ongoing and RIVA’s deadline to file its motion for class certification 25 is September 5, 2025. Dkt. 19 at 5:22-25, 12:4-8. Trial is not set to begin until January 25, 2027. 26 Dkt. 19 at 11:15-19, 12:22. Thus, the parties are seeking this extension as soon as the need has 27 become apparent. 1 8. This is the parties’ first request for an extension of the deadlines in the Court’s 2 Pretrial Scheduling Order. 3 9. The parties are not stipulating to, and requesting the Court’s approval of, this 120- 4 day continuance and extension of deadlines for purposes of delay, but rather so that justice may 5 be done. 6 10. Below is a table showing the stipulated deadline extensions:

7 Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline 8 Motion for Class Certification September 5, 2025 January 12, 2026 9 Joint Mid-Discovery and Mediation Status February 12, 2026 October 15, 2025 10 Report 11 Opposition to Motion for Class Certification December 8, 2025 April 7, 2026 12 Reply to Motion for Class Certification February 6, 2026 June 8, 2026 13 Hearing on Motion for Class Certification March 3, 2026 June 30, 2026 14 Expert Disclosures April 21, 2026 August 19, 2026 15 Rebuttal Expert Disclosures May 26, 2026 September 23, 2026 16 Non-Expert Discovery Completion May 5, 2026 September 2, 2026 17 Expert Discovery Completion June 23, 2026 October 21, 2026 18 If cross-motions for summary judgment,1 June 16, 2026 October 14, 2026 19 Plaintiff’s Summary Judgment Motion Filed By 20 If no cross-motions for summary judgment, October 28, 2026 June 30, 2026 Dispositive Motion Filed By 21 Dispositive Motions Heard By August 4, 2026 December 1, 2026 22 21 days before the 21 days before the 23 Joint Pretrial Statement Filed By FPTC FPTC 24 14 days before the 14 days before the Motions In Limine Filed By FPTC FPTC 25

26 1 If both Plaintiff and Defendant intend to file motions for summary judgment, the parties must 27 follow the schedule set out in Judge Kim’s Civil Standing Orders for cross-motions for summary judgment. 1 Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline 2 Final Pretrial Conference (“FPTC”) and Motions December 14, 2026 April 12, 2027 In Limine Hearing 3 Jury Trial (5-10 days) January 25, 2027 May 24, 2027 4 Dated: July 16, 2025 Respectfully Submitted, 5 MORGAN AND MORGAN, 6 COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP 7 By: /s/Michael F. Ram 8 Michael F. Ram

9 Michael F. Ram, SBN 104805 [email protected] 10 Marie N. Appel, SBN 187483 11 [email protected] Colin Losey, SBN 352223 12 [email protected] MORGAN & MORGAN 13 COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP 711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500 14 San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone: (415) 846-3862 15 Facsimile: (415) 358-6923 16 Jeffrey B. Cereghino, SBN 99480 17 [email protected] CEREGHINO LAW GROUP LLP 18 737 Bryant Street San Francisco, CA 94107 19 Telephone: (415) 433-4949 20 Facsimile: (415) 433-7311

21 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class

22 Dated: July 16, 2025 Respectfully Submitted, 23 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, 24 LLP

25 By: /s/Fletcher C. Alford (as authorized on 7/14/2025) Fletcher C. Alford 26

27 Fletcher C. Alford, SBN 152314 [email protected] 1 Kevin Liu, SBN 295287 2 [email protected] Myles Lanzone, SBN 257791 3 [email protected] GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, 4 LLP 315 Pacific Avenue 5 San Francisco, California 94111 6 Telephone: (415) 986-5900 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 7 Attorneys for Defendant 8 THE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, INC., dba THE MANAGEMENT TRUST 9

10 11 [PROPOSED] MODIFIED ORDER 12 Finding good cause, the Court will grant the Parties’ request to modify the Court’s 13 1/30/2025 Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 19) as follows: 14 Event Current Deadline New Deadline 15 Motion for Class Certification September 5, 2025 January 12, 2026 16 Joint Mid-Discovery and Mediation Status February 12, 2026 17 October 15, 2025 Report 18 Opposition to Motion for Class Certification December 8, 2025 April 7, 2026 19 Reply to Motion for Class Certification February 6, 2026 June 8, 2026 20 Hearing on Motion for Class Certification March 3, 2026 June 30, 2026 21 Expert Disclosures April 21, 2026 August 19, 2026 22 Rebuttal Expert Disclosures May 26, 2026 September 23, 2026 23 Non-Expert Discovery Completion May 5, 2026 September 2, 2026 24 Expert Discovery Completion June 23, 2026 October 21, 2026 25 26 27 9 || If cross-motions for summary judgment,’ October 13, 2026 Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Motion Filed By June 16, 2026 3 If no cross-motions for summary judgment, October 27, 2026 4 || Dispositive Motion Filed By June 30, 2026 5 || Dispositive Motions Heard By August 4, 2026 December 1, 2026 6 . . . 21 days before the | 21 days before the , Joint Pretrial Statement Filed By FPTC FPTC . . 14 days before the | 14 days before the 8 || Motions In Limine Filed By FPTC FPTC 9 : 66 ” 1 Final Pretrial Conference (“FPTC”) and Motions December 14, 2026 | April 12, 2027 10 || In Limine Hearing 1] || Jury Trial (5-10 days) January 25, 2027 May 24, 2027 12 Cha Spo 14 | Dated: July 16, 2025 Hon. Chi Soo Kim 15 United States Magistrate Judge 16 4, riva2782.24 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 | If both Plaintiff and Defendant intend to file motions for summary judgment, the parties must 27 | follow the schedule set out in Judge Kim’s Civil Standing Orders for cross-motions for summary judgment.

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED MODIFIED ORDER Case No. 2:24-cv-02782-CSK