Anderson v. Riverwalk Holdings, LTD et al

Filing 21

SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 6/20/2016. Consent/Decline due by 6/30/2016. Pleading Amendment Deadline 9/20/2016. Discovery Deadlines: Initial Disclosures 7/5/2016; Non-Expert 3/31/2017; Expert 3/31/2017. Mid -Discovery Status Conference set for 12/2/2016 at 09:00 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 4/14/2017; Hearing by 5/12/2017. Dispositive Motion Deadlin es: Filed by 4/28/2017; Hearing by 6/14/2017. Pretrial Conference set for 8/8/2017 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. Jury Trial set for 10/3/2017 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before Chief 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

FREDERICK C. ANDERSON,
Plaintiff,

11
v.

12
13

RIVERWALK HOLDINGS, LTD, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:16-CV-00251 - LJO - JLT
SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16)
Pleading Amendment Deadline: 9/20/2016
Discovery Deadlines:
Initial Disclosures: 7/5/2016
Non-Expert: 3/31/2017
Expert: 3/31/2017
Mid-Discovery Status Conference:
12/2/2016 at 9:00 a.m.

16
17

Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 4/14/2017
Hearing: 5/12/2017

18
19

Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 4/28/2017
Hearing: 6/14/2017

20
21
22

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

23
24

Trial:

25
26
27
28

I.

Date of Scheduling Conference
June 20, 2016.
1

10/3/2017 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 4
Jury trial: 3-5 days

1

II.

Appearances of Counsel

2

Matthew Loker appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

3

Tamar Gabriel appeared on behalf of Defendants.

4

III.

Magistrate Judge Consent:

5

Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing

6

Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the newly adopted policy of the Fresno Division of

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11
12

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

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17
18

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

19

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

20

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

21

District of California.
Therefore, the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to

22
23

conduct all further proceedings, including trial. Within 10 days of the date of this order, counsel

24

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

25

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

26

IV.

27
28

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

motion to amend, no later than September 20, 2016.
2

1

V.

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

2
3

on or before July 5, 2016.
The parties are ordered to complete all discovery, pertaining to non-experts and experts, no later

4
5

Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date

than March 31, 2017.
The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, on or before January 27,

6
7

2017, and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before February 24, 2017. The written designation of

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

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

12
13

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

14

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

15

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

16
17

disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced.
A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for December 2, 2016, 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. Counsel SHALL file a joint mid-discovery status conference report one week before the

21

conference. Counsel also SHALL lodge the status report via e-mail to [e-mail].

22

The joint statement SHALL outline the discovery counsel have completed and that which needs to be

23

completed as well as any impediments to completing the discovery within the deadlines set forth in this

24

order. Counsel may appear via CourtCall, providing a written notice of the intent to appear

25

telephonically is provided to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Deputy Clerk no later than five court

26

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
3

1

than April 14, 2017, and heard on or before May 12, 2017. Non-dispositive motions are heard before

2

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

3

Bakersfield, California.
No motion to amend or stipulation to amend the case schedule will be entertained unless it

4
5

is filed at least one week before the first deadline the parties wish to extend. Likewise, no written

6

discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the assigned Magistrate Judge. A party

7

with a discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve by

8

agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the moving party promptly

9

shall seek a telephonic hearing with all involved parties and the Magistrate Judge. It shall be the

10

obligation of the moving party to arrange and originate the conference call to the court. To schedule

11

this telephonic hearing, the parties are ordered to contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Susan Hall, at

12

[phone] or via email at [e-mail]. Counsel must comply with Local Rule 251

13

with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied without prejudice and dropped

14

from the Court’s calendar.
All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than April 28, 2017, and heard no later

15
16

than June 14, 2017, in Courtroom 4 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United

17

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

18

and Local Rules 230 and 260.

19

VII.

Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication

20

At least 21 days before filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for summary

21

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

22

to be raised in the motion.

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

expense of briefing a motion; and 6) to develop a joint statement of undisputed facts.

28

The moving party SHALL initiate the meeting and SHALL provide a complete, proposed
4

1

statement of undisputed facts at least five days before the conference. The finalized joint statement of

2

undisputed facts SHALL include all facts that the parties agree, for purposes of the motion, may be

3

deemed true. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260, the moving party shall file the joint

4

statement of undisputed facts.
In the notice of motion the moving party SHALL certify that the parties have met and conferred

5
6

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

7

comply may result in the motion being stricken.

8

VIII. Pre-Trial Conference Date
August 8, 2017, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill.

9

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

10
11

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

12

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

13
14

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

15

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

16

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

17

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

18

IX.

October 3, 2017, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United

19
20

Trial Date

States District Court Judge.

21

A.

This is a jury trial.

22

B.

Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 3-5 days.

23

C.

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

24

California, Rule 285.

25

X.

Settlement Conference

26

The parties do not request a settlement conference at this time. If they agree in the future that a

27

settlement conference is likely to be fruitful, they may file a stipulation with proposed dates, requesting

28

the Court set a settlement conference at that time.
5

1

XI.

Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other

2

Techniques to Shorten Trial

3

Not applicable at this time.

4
5
6
7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

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

12

XIV. Effect of this Order

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

subsequent status conference.

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

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

22

for granting the relief requested.

23

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

24
25
26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 20, 2016

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
6