Wolfe v. Tehachapi Unified School District

Filing 35

SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 3/23/2017. Consent/Decline Deadline 4/3/2017. Pleading Amendment Deadline 6/30/2017. Administrative Record Deadline: Filing by 4/27/2017; Objections by 5/15/2017. Merits Briefing: Opening Brief by 6/16/2017; Response by 7/14/2017; Reply by 8/4/2017; Hearing by 9/5/2017. Further Scheduling Conference set for 9/18/2017 at 09:15 AM in Bakersfield, 510 19th Street before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

J.T., by and through his guardian ad litem
JANICE WOLFE,

11

Plaintiff,

12
v.

13
14

TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT,

15

Defendant.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1: 16-CV-01492 - DAD - JLT
SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16)
Pleading Amendment Deadline: 6/30/2017
Administrative Record Deadline
Filing: 4/27/2017
Objections to the record: 5/15/2017
Merits Briefing:
Opening Brief: 6/16/2017
Defendant’s response: 7/14/2017
Reply brief: 8/4/2017
Hearing deadline: 9/5/2017

17

Further Scheduling Conference:
9/18/2017 at 9:15 a.m.

18
19
20
21

I.

March 23, 2017.

22
23

Date of Scheduling Conference

II.

Appearances of Counsel

24

Andrea Marcus appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

25

Anthony DeMaria appeared on behalf of Defendant.

26

III.

Magistrate Judge Consent:

27

Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing

28

Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the newly adopted policy of the Fresno Division of
1

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5
6

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

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11
12

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

13

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

14

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

15

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

16
17

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

18

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

19

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

20

IV.

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

21
22

motion to amend, no later than June 30, 2017. Any motion to amend the pleadings shall be heard by

23

the Honorable Dale A. Drozd, United States District Court Judge.

24

V.

Administrative Record

25

Plaintiff SHALL lodge a searchable electronic copy of the administrative record no later than

26

April 27, 2017. Plaintiff SHALL also provide a courtesy paper copy to Judge O’Neill’s chambers at

27

the time of the filing of the opening brief. Any objections to the record SHALL be filed no later than

28

May 15, 2017.
2

1

If there is a dispute over the contents of the administrative record, the objecting party SHALL

2

confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve the issues in dispute. If that good faith

3

effort is unsuccessful, the objecting party SHALL promptly seek a telephonic hearing with all involved

4

parties and the Magistrate Judge. It is the obligation of the objecting party to arrange and originate the

5

conference call to the Court. To schedule this telephonic hearing, the parties are ordered to contact

6

Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Susan Hall at [phone] or via email at [e-mail].

7

VI.

Plaintiff’s opening brief SHALL be filed no later than June 16, 2017, and Defendant’s

8
9
10

Merits Briefing and Hearing

opposition brief SHALL be filed no later than July 14, 20171. Plaintiff’s reply, if any, SHALL be
filed no later than August 4, 2017.
The hearing SHALL be set before the Honorable Dale A. Drozd, United States District Court

11
12

Judge, in Courtroom 5, no later than September 5, 2017.

13

VII.

Further Scheduling Conference
A further scheduling conference is set on September 18, 2017 at 9:15 a.m. The parties SHALL

14
15

file a joint status report seven days prior to the hearing.

16

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

17
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

IX.

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

23
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
27
28

1

The Court was informed of the busy trial schedule on counsel for the defendant. If the trial, discussed at the
scheduling conference, proceeds on June 12, 2017, and counsel will be unable to proper the opposing brief, counsel
may stipulate to amend the briefing schedule.

3

1

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

2

subsequent status conference.

3

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

4

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

5

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

6

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

7

for granting the relief requested.

8

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

9
10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 23, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4