Patterson v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Filing 42

SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 11/23/2015. Consent/Decline Deadline 12/3/2015. Pleading Amendment Deadline 2/1/2016. Discovery Deadlines: Initial Disclosures 12/14/2015; Non-Expert 2/8/2017; Expert 7/10/2017. M id-Discovery Status Conference set for 11/7/2016 at 08:30 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 7/31/2017; Hearing by 8/28/2017. Dispositive Motion Deadlin es: Filed by 9/18/2017; Hearing by 8/28/2017. Pretrial Conference set for 1/9/2018 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. Jury Trial set for 3/6/2018 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. (Hall, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 KAREAMA PATTERSON, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 15 v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1: 14-CV-01087 - LJO - JLT SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16) Pleading Amendment Deadline: 2/1/2016 Discovery Deadlines: Initial Disclosures: 12/14/2015 Non-Expert: 2/8/2017 Expert: 7/10/2017 Mid-Discovery Status Conference: 11/7/16 at 8:30 a.m. 16 17 Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filing: 7/31/2017 Hearing: 8/28/2017 18 19 Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filing: 9/18/2017 Hearing: 11/14/2017 20 21 22 Pre-Trial Conference: 1/9/2018 at 8:30 a.m. Courtroom 4 23 24 Trial: 25 26 27 28 1 3/6/2018 at 8:30 a.m. Courtroom 4 Jury trial: 21 days 1 I. November 24, 2017. 2 3 Date of Scheduling Conference II. Appearances of Counsel 4 Lawrence Jones appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. 5 Amir Nassihi appeared on behalf of Defendants. 6 III. Magistrate Judge Consent: 7 Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing 8 Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the newly adopted policy of the Fresno Division of 9 the Eastern District is to trail all civil cases. The parties are hereby notified that for a trial date set 10 before a District Judge, the parties will trail indefinitely behind any higher priority criminal or older 11 civil case set on the same date until a courtroom becomes available. The trial date will not be reset to a 12 continued date. The Magistrate Judges’ availability is far more realistic and accommodating to parties than that 13 14 of the U.S. District Judges who carry the heaviest caseloads in the nation and who must prioritize 15 criminal and older civil cases over more recently filed civil cases. A United States Magistrate Judge 16 may conduct trials, including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of 17 Civil Procedure 73, and Local Rule 305. Any appeal from a judgment entered by a United States 18 Magistrate Judge is taken directly to the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. The Fresno Division of the Eastern District of California, whenever possible, is utilizing United 19 20 States Article III District Court Judges from throughout the nation as Visiting Judges. Pursuant to the 21 Local Rules, Appendix A, such reassignments will be random, and the parties will receive no advance 22 notice before their case is reassigned to an Article III District Court Judge from outside of the Eastern 23 District of California. Therefore, the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to 24 25 conduct all further proceedings, including trial. Within 10 days of the date of this order, counsel 26 SHALL file a consent/decline form (provided by the Court at the inception of this case) indicating 27 whether they will consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. 28 /// 2 1 IV. Pleading Amendment Deadline Any requested pleading amendments are ordered to be filed, either through a stipulation or 2 3 motion to amend, no later than February 1, 2016. 4 V. The parties are ordered to exchange the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) 5 6 on or before December 14, 2015. The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before 7 8 Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date February 8, 2017, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before July 10, 2017. Plaintiff is directed to disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, on or before March 17, 2017, 9 10 and Defendant shall disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, no later than April 7, 2017.1 Plaintiff 11 shall disclose any rebuttal experts on or before May 5, 2017. The written designation of retained and 12 non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A), (B), and (C) and 13 shall include all information required thereunder. Failure to designate experts in compliance with 14 this order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other evidence offered through such 15 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 16 17 and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions 18 included in the designation. Failure to comply will result in the imposition of sanctions, which may 19 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 20 21 disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced. A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for November 7, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. before the 22 23 Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, U.S. Magistrate Judge, located at 510 19th Street, Bakersfield, 24 California, 93301. A Joint Mid-Discovery Status Conference Report, carefully prepared and executed 25 by all counsel, shall be electronically filed in CM/ECF, one full week prior to the Conference, and shall 26 be e-mailed, in Word format, to JLTorders@caed.uscourts.gov. The joint statement SHALL outline the 27 28 1 In the event an expert will offer opinions related to an independent medical or mental health evaluation, the 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 discovery that has been completed and that which needs to be completed as well as any impediments to 2 completing the discovery within the deadlines set forth in this order. Counsel may appear via 3 CourtCall, providing a written request to so appear is made to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Clerk 4 no later than five court days before the noticed hearing date. 5 VI. 6 Pre-Trial Motion Schedule All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later 7 than July 31, 2017, and heard on or before August 28, 2017. Non-dispositive motions are heard before 8 the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, United States Magistrate Judge at the United States Courthouse in 9 Bakersfield, California. 10 No written discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the assigned 11 Magistrate Judge. A party with a discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good 12 faith effort to resolve by agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the 13 moving party promptly shall seek a telephonic hearing with all involved parties and the Magistrate 14 Judge. It shall be the obligation of the moving party to arrange and originate the conference call to the 15 court. To schedule this telephonic hearing, the parties are ordered to contact Courtroom Deputy Clerk, 16 Susan Hall at (661) 326-6620 or via email at SHall@caed.uscourts.gov. Counsel must comply with 17 Local Rule 251 with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied without prejudice 18 and dropped from calendar. 19 In scheduling such motions, the Magistrate Judge may grant applications for an order shortening 20 time pursuant to Local Rule 144(e). However, if counsel does not obtain an order shortening time, the 21 notice of motion must comply with Local Rule 251. 22 Counsel may appear and argue non-dispositive motions via CourtCall, providing a written 23 request to so appear is made to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Clerk no later than five court days 24 before the noticed hearing date. 25 All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than September 18, 2017, and heard no 26 later than November 14, 2017, in Courtroom 4 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, 27 United States District Court Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed. R. 28 Civ. P. 56 and Local Rules 230 and 260. 4 1 VII. Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication 2 At least 21 days before filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for summary 3 adjudication, the parties are ORDERED to meet, in person or by telephone, to confer about the issues 4 to be raised in the motion. 5 The purpose of the meeting shall be to: 1) avoid filing motions for summary judgment where a 6 question of fact exists; 2) determine whether the respondent agrees that the motion has merit in whole 7 or in part; 3) discuss whether issues can be resolved without the necessity of briefing; 4) narrow the 8 issues for review by the court; 5) explore the possibility of settlement before the parties incur the 9 expense of briefing a summary judgment motion; and, 6) to develop a joint statement of undisputed 10 11 facts. The moving party SHALL initiate the meeting and SHALL provide a complete, proposed 12 statement of undisputed facts at least five days before the conference. The finalized joint statement of 13 undisputed facts SHALL include all facts that the parties agree, for purposes of the motion, may be 14 deemed true. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260, the moving party shall file the joint 15 statement of undisputed facts. 16 In the notice of motion the moving party SHALL certify that the parties have met and conferred 17 as ordered above, or set forth a statement of good cause for the failure to meet and confer. Failure to 18 comply may result in the motion being stricken. 19 VIII. Pre-Trial Conference Date 20 January 9, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before Judge O'Neill. 21 The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pretrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2). 22 The parties are further directed to submit a digital copy of their pretrial statement in Word format, 23 directly to Judge O'Neill's chambers, by email at LJOorders@caed.uscourts.gov. 24 Counsels' attention is directed to Rules 281 and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the 25 Eastern District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the pre-trial conference. 26 The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules. In addition to the matters set forth in the 27 Local Rules the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include a Joint Statement of the case to be used by the 28 Court to explain the nature of the case to the jury during voir dire. 5 1 IX. March 6, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United 2 3 Trial Date States District Court Judge. 4 A. This is a jury trial. 5 B. Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 21 days. 6 C. Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of 7 California, Rule 285. 8 X. Settlement Conference 9 The parties may file a joint written request for a settlement conference if they believe the matter 10 is in a settlement posture and a conference with the Court would be fruitful. The settlement conference 11 will be conducted by Magistrate Judge Thurston, unless any party prefers that the conference be 12 conducted by a judicial officer not assigned to this case. In that event, the request must state this 13 preference. 14 XI. Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other 15 Techniques to Shorten Trial 16 Not applicable at this time. 17 18 19 20 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 21 and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep abreast of any 22 amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to efficiently 23 handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow the Rules as provided 24 in both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of 25 California. 26 XIV. Effect of this Order 27 28 The foregoing order represents the best estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most suitable to dispose of this case. The trial date reserved is specifically reserved for this case. If the 6 1 parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met, counsel are ordered 2 to notify the court immediately of that fact so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by 3 subsequent status conference. 4 The dates set in this Order are considered to be firm and will not be modified absent a 5 showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. Stipulations 6 extending the deadlines contained herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by 7 affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached exhibits, which establish good cause 8 for granting the relief requested. 9 Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions. 10 11 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 23, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?