Arrieta v. County of Kern

Filing 39

SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 8/27/2014. Consent/Decline Deadline 9/8/2014. Pleading Amendment Deadline 11/24/2014. Discovery Deadlines: Initial Disclosures 9/12/2014; Non-Expert 7/27/2015; Expert 10/9/2015. Mid-Discovery Status Conference set for 3/10/2015 at 09:00 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 10/19/2015; Hearing by 11/19/2015. Dispositive Motion D eadlines: Filed by 12/1/2015; Hearing by 1/19/2016. Settlement Conference set for 11/12/2015 at 09:30 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Pretrial Conference set for 3/15/2016 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. Jury Trial set for 5/24/2016 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
COUNTY OF KERN, et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
AND RELATED CONSOLIDATED CASES )
)
)

Lead Case No: 1: 14-CV-0400 - LJO - JLT

FRANCISCO ARRIETA, et al.,

SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16)
Pleading Amendment Deadline: 11/24/2014
Discovery Deadlines:
Initial Disclosures: 9/12/2014
Non-Expert: 7/27/2015
Expert: 10/9/2015
Mid-Discovery Status Conference:
3/10/2015 at 9:00 a.m.
Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 10/19/2015
Hearing: 11/19/2015

18
19

Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 12/1/2015
Hearing: 1/19/2016

20
21
22

Settlement Conference:
11/12/2015 at 9:30 a.m.
510 19th Street, Bakersfield, CA

23
24

26

Pre-Trial Conference:
3/15/2016 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 4

27

Trial:

25

28
1

5/24/2016 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 4
Jury trial: 5-7 days

1

I.

August 27, 2014.

2
3

II.

Appearances of Counsel
John Kawai appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs Francisco Arrieta, Laura Vasquez, Maria

4
5

Date of Scheduling Conference

Melendez, Sulina Quair, Melissa Quair, and T.A.
Leonard Herr appeared on behalf of the Defendants County of Kern, Enrique Bravo, and

6
7

Brandon Rutledge.

8

III.

9
10

Magistrate Judge Consent:
Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing
Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the newly adopted policy of the Fresno Division of

11

the Eastern District is to trail all civil cases. The parties are hereby notified that for a trial date set

12

before a District Judge, the parties will trail indefinitely behind any higher priority criminal or older

13

civil case set on the same date until a courtroom becomes available. The trial date will not be reset to a

14

continued date.

15

The Magistrate Judges’ availability is far more realistic and accommodating to parties than that

16

of the U.S. District Judges who carry the heaviest caseloads in the nation and who must prioritize

17

criminal and older civil cases over more recently filed civil cases. A United States Magistrate Judge

18

may conduct trials, including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of

19

Civil Procedure 73, and Local Rule 305. Any appeal from a judgment entered by a United States

20

Magistrate Judge is taken directly to the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit.

21

The Fresno Division of the Eastern District of California, whenever possible, is utilizing United

22

States Article III District Court Judges from throughout the nation as Visiting Judges. Pursuant to the

23

Local Rules, Appendix A, such reassignments will be random, and the parties will receive no advance

24

notice before their case is reassigned to an Article III District Court Judge from outside of the Eastern

25

District of California.

26
27

Therefore, the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to
conduct all further proceedings, including trial. Within 10 days of the date of this order, counsel

28
2

1

SHALL file a consent/decline form (provided by the Court at the inception of this case) indicating

2

whether they will consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge.

3

IV.

Pleading Amendment Deadline
Any requested pleading amendments are ordered to be filed, either through a stipulation or

4
5

motion to amend, no later than November 24, 2014.

6

V.

The parties are ordered to exchange the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)

7
8

on or before September 12, 2014.
The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before July 27,

9
10

Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date

2015, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before October 9, 2015.
The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses1, in writing, on or before August 10,

11
12

2015, and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before September 11, 2015. The written designation of

13

retained and non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A), (B),

14

and (C) and shall include all information required thereunder. Failure to designate experts in

15

compliance with this order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other evidence offered

16

through such experts that are not disclosed pursuant to this order.
The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) and (5) shall apply to all discovery relating to experts

17
18

and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions

19

included in the designation. Failure to comply will result in the imposition of sanctions, which may

20

include striking the expert designation and preclusion of expert testimony.
The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party's duty to timely supplement

21
22

disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced.
Counsel in this matter and counsel in Garlick v. County of Kern (Lead Case No. 1:13-cv-01051

23
24

LJO JLT) have agreed that discovery in these matters will be coordinated. They agree that the

25

depositions of the plaintiffs in this matter will be taken only once, for a maximum of ten hours, and that

26
27
1

28

In the event an expert will offer opinions related to an independent medical or mental health evaluation, this
examination SHALL occur sufficiently in advance of the disclosure deadline so the expert’s report fully details the
expert’s opinions in this regard.

3

1

the deposition transcripts may be used in this matter and in the Garlick matter. However, all deposition

2

notices issued in either case will be served on all counsel in this matter and in the Garlick matter.

3

As to any deposition at which there will be counsel from both matters participating, counsel will

4

meet and confer to determine whether the time limit for any party or witness in either matter, excluding

5

those mentioned above, needs to be expanded to accommodate the additional lawyers asking questions.

6

The Court anticipates that no deposition will exceed ten hours. In no event will a deposition of a

7

party or witness in either matter be permitted to be taken more than once without prior order of

8

the Court or stipulation of counsel.
Finally, all counsel in this matter and the Garlick matter agree that all written discovery and all

9
10

responses thereto propounded in either case will be served on counsel in both cases.

11

Counsel will meet and confer and use good faith efforts to develop a stipulated protective that will

12

address the confidential information that is anticipated to be sought in discovery. Counsel SHALL file

13

a stipulated protective order no later than September 22, 2014 for the Court’s consideration. If counsel

14

are unable to agree as to all terms of the protective order, they SHALL file a document which sets forth

15

all of the terms to which they agree along with those terms to which they do not agree. This second

16

category of terms shall be highlighted such that the Court can discern which terms are disputed and the

17

alternative language proposed, no later than September 22, 2014.
A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for March 10, 2015 at 9:00 a.m., before the

18
19

Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, U.S. Magistrate Judge, located at 510 19th Street, Bakersfield,

20

California, 93301. A Joint Mid-Discovery Status Conference Report, carefully prepared and executed

21

by all counsel, shall be electronically filed in CM/ECF, one full week prior to the Conference, and shall

22

be e-mailed, in Word format, to [e-mail]. The joint statement SHALL outline the

23

discovery that has been completed and that which needs to be completed as well as any impediments to

24

completing the discovery within the deadlines set forth in this order. Counsel may appear via

25

CourtCall, providing a written request to so appear is made to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Clerk

26

no later than five court days before the noticed hearing date.

27

VI.

28

Pre-Trial Motion Schedule
All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later
4

1

than October 19, 2015, and heard on or before November 16, 2015. Non-dispositive motions are

2

heard before the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, United States Magistrate Judge at the United States

3

Courthouse in Bakersfield, California.
No written discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the assigned

4
5

Magistrate Judge. A party with a discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good

6

faith effort to resolve by agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the

7

moving party promptly shall seek a telephonic hearing with all involved parties and the Magistrate

8

Judge. It shall be the obligation of the moving party to arrange and originate the conference call to the

9

court. To schedule this telephonic hearing, the parties are ordered to contact Courtroom Deputy Clerk,

10

Susan Hall at [phone] or via email at [e-mail]. Counsel must comply with

11

Local Rule 251 with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied without prejudice

12

and dropped from calendar.
In scheduling such motions, the Magistrate Judge may grant applications for an order shortening

13
14

time pursuant to Local Rule 144(e). However, if counsel does not obtain an order shortening time, the

15

notice of motion must comply with Local Rule 251.
Counsel may appear and argue non-dispositive motions via CourtCall, providing a written

16
17

request to so appear is made to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Clerk no later than five court days

18

before the noticed hearing date.

19

All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than December 1, 2015, and heard no

20

later than January 19, 2016, in Courtroom 4 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill,

21

United States District Court Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed. R.

22

Civ. P. 56 and Local Rules 230 and 260.

23

VII.

24

Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication
At least 21 days before filing a motion for summary judgment or a motion for summary

25

adjudication, the parties are ORDERED to meet, in person or by telephone, to confer about the issues

26

to be raised in the motion.

27

The purpose of the meeting shall be to: 1) avoid filing motions for summary judgment where a

28

question of fact exists; 2) determine whether the respondent agrees that the motion has merit in whole
5

1

or in part; 3) discuss whether issues can be resolved without the necessity of briefing; 4) narrow the

2

issues for review by the court; 5) explore the possibility of settlement before the parties incur the

3

expense of briefing a summary judgment motion; 6) to arrive at a joint statement of undisputed facts.

4

The moving party shall initiate the meeting and provide a draft of the joint statement of

5

undisputed facts. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260, the moving party shall file a

6

joint statement of undisputed facts. The joint statement of undisputed facts SHALL include all facts

7

that the parties agree, for purposes of the motion, may be deemed true. Thus, the moving party

8

SHALL provide opposing counsel a complete, proposed statement of undisputed facts at least five

9

days before the conference.
In the notice of motion the moving party shall certify that the parties have met and conferred as

10
11

ordered above, or set forth a statement of good cause for the failure to meet and confer.

12

VIII. Pre-Trial Conference Date

13

March 15, 2016, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before Judge O'Neill.

14

The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pretrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2).

15

The parties are further directed to submit a digital copy of their pretrial statement in Word format,

16

directly to Judge O'Neill's chambers, by email at [e-mail].
Counsels' attention is directed to Rules 281 and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the

17
18

Eastern District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the pre-trial conference.

19

The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules. In addition to the matters set forth in the

20

Local Rules the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include a Joint Statement of the case to be used by the

21

Court to explain the nature of the case to the jury during voir dire.

22

IX.

23
24

Trial Date
May 24, 2016, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United

States District Court Judge.

25

A.

This is a jury trial.

26

B.

Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 5-7 days.

27

C.

Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of

28

California, Rule 285.
6

1

X.

Settlement Conference
A Settlement Conference is scheduled for November 12, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. at 510 19th Street,

2
3

Bakersfield, California. The settlement conference will be conducted by Magistrate Judge Thurston. If

4

any party prefers that the settlement conference be conducted by a judicial officer who is not

5

assigned to this matter, that party is directed to notify the Court no later than 60 days in advance

6

of the scheduled settlement conference to allow sufficient time for another judicial officer to be

7

assigned to handle the conference.

8

Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall

9

appear at the Settlement Conference with the parties and the person or persons having full authority

10

to negotiate and settle the case on any terms2 at the conference. Consideration of settlement is a

11

serious matter that requires preparation prior to the settlement conference. Set forth below are the

12

procedures the Court will employ, absent good cause, in conducting the conference.
At least 21 days before the settlement conference, Plaintiff SHALL submit to Defendant via

13
14

fax or e-mail, a written itemization of damages and a meaningful3 settlement demand which includes a

15

brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate. Thereafter, no later than 14 days before the

16

settlement conference, Defendant SHALL respond, via fax or e-mail, with an acceptance of the offer or

17

with a meaningful counteroffer that includes a brief explanation of why such a settlement is

18

appropriate.
If settlement is not achieved, each party SHALL attach copies of their settlement offers to their

19
20

Confidential Settlement Conference Statement, as described below. Copies of these documents shall

21

not be filed on the court docket.

22

///

23
24
25
26
27
28

2

Insurance carriers, business organizations, and governmental bodies or agencies whose settlement agreements
are subject to approval by legislative bodies, executive committees, boards of directors or the like shall be represented by a
person or persons who occupy high executive positions in the party organization and who will be directly involved in the
process of approval of any settlement offers or agreements. To the extent possible the representative shall have the
authority, if he or she deems it appropriate, to settle the action on terms consistent with the opposing party's most recent
demand.
3
“Meaningful” means that the offer is reasonably calculated to settle the case on terms acceptable to the offering
party. “Meaningful” does not include an offer which the offering party knows will not be acceptable to the other party. If,
however, the offering party is only willing to offer a settlement which it knows the other party will not accept, this should
trigger a recognition the case is not in a settlement posture and the parties should confer about continuing or vacating the
settlement conference via stipulation.

7

CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT

1

At least five court days prior to the Settlement Conference, the parties shall submit, directly to

2
3

Judge Thurston's chambers by e-mail to [e-mail], a Confidential Settlement

4

Conference Statement. The statement should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor served on

5

any other party, although the parties may file a Notice of Lodging of Settlement Conference

6

Statement. Each statement shall be clearly marked "confidential" with the date and time of the

7

Settlement Conference indicated prominently thereon.

8

The Confidential Settlement Conference Statement shall include the following:

9

A.

A brief statement of the facts of the case.

10

B.

A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon which

11

the claims are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties' likelihood of prevailing on

12

the claims and defenses; and a description of the major issues in dispute.

13

C.

A summary of the proceedings to date.

14

D.

An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial and trial.

15

E.

The relief sought.

16

F.

The party's position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a history of
past settlement discussions, offers and demands.

17
18

XI.

Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other

19

Techniques to Shorten Trial

20

Not applicable at this time.

21
22
23
24

XII.

Related Matters Pending
There are no pending related matters.

XIII. Compliance with Federal Procedure
All counsel are expected to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

25

and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep abreast of any

26

amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to efficiently

27

handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow the Rules as provided

28
8

1

in both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of

2

California.

3

XIV. Effect of this Order

4

The foregoing order represents the best estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most

5

suitable to dispose of this case. The trial date reserved is specifically reserved for this case. If the

6

parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met, counsel are ordered

7

to notify the court immediately of that fact so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by

8

subsequent status conference.

9

The dates set in this Order are considered to be firm and will not be modified absent a

10

showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. Stipulations

11

extending the deadlines contained herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by

12

affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached exhibits, which establish good cause

13

for granting the relief requested.

14

Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions.

15
16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 27, 2014

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9