Taylor v. Northern Inyo Hospital et al

Filing 17

SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 2/9/2016. Consent/Decline due within 10 days. Pleading Amendment Deadline 5/9/2016. Discovery Deadlines: Non-Expert 11/14/2016; Expert 1/13/2017. Mid-Discovery Status Conferenc e set for 6/28/2016 at 08:30 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 1/23/2017; Hearing by 2/21/2017. Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 3/10/2017; Hea ring by 5/9/2017. Pretrial Conference set for 7/11/2017 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. Jury Trial set for 9/12/2017 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

MARTHINA TAYLOR,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15

v.
NORTHERN INYO HOSPITAL, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1: 15-CV-01607 - LJO - JLT
SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16)
Pleading Amendment Deadline: 5/9/2016
Discovery Deadlines:
Non-Expert: 11/14/2016
Expert: 1/13/2017
Mid-Discovery Status Conference:
6/28/2016 at 8:30 a.m.

16
17

Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 1/23/2017
Hearing: 2/21/2017

18
19

Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 3/10/2017
Hearing: 5/9/2017

20
21

23

Pre-Trial Conference:
7/11/2017 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 4

24

Trial:

22

25
26
27
28
1

9/12/2017 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 4
Jury trial: 7-10 days

1

I.

February 9, 2016.

2
3

Date of Scheduling Conference

II.

Appearances of Counsel

4

Leonard Sansanowicz appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

5

Andrea Douglas 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, Defendants 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 May 9, 2016.

4

V.

Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date

5

The parties have exchanged the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1).

6

The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before

7
8

November 14, 2016, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before January 13, 2017.
The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses1, in writing, on or before November 28,

9

2016, and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before December 19, 2016. The written designation of

10

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

11

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

12

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

13

through such experts that are not disclosed pursuant to this order.

14

The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) and (5) shall apply to all discovery relating to experts

15

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

16

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

17

include striking the expert designation and preclusion of expert testimony.

18
19
20

The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party's duty to timely supplement
disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced.
A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for June 28, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. before the

21

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

22

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

23

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

24

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

25

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

26
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

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

2

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

3

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

4

VI.

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

5
6

than January 23, 2017, and heard on or before February 21, 2017. Non-dispositive motions are heard

7

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

8

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

9
10

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

11

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

12

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

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

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

18
19

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

20

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

21
22

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

23

before the noticed hearing date.
All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than March 10, 2017, and heard no later

24
25

than May 9, 2017, in Courtroom 4 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United

26

States District Court Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56

27

and Local Rules 230 and 260.

28

///
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

July 11, 2017, 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 [e-mail].

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.

September 12, 2017, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill,

2
3

Trial Date

United States District Court Judge.

4

A.

This is a jury trial.

5

B.

Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 7-10 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

If the parties desire a settlement conference with the Court, they may file a joint written request

10

for a conference. At that time, a settlement conference will be set with the assigned Magistrate Judge.

11

XI.

Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other

12

Techniques to Shorten Trial

13

Not applicable at this time.

14
15
16
17

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

18

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

19

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

20

handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow both the Federal

21

Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California.

22

XIV. Effect of this Order

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

subsequent status conference.

28
6

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

for granting the relief requested.

6

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

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 9, 2016

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7