Lange v. Target Corporation

Filing 8

SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 11/20/2017. Pleading Amendment Deadline 1/15/2018. Discovery Deadlines: Initial Disclosures 11/28/2017; Non-Expert 4/17/2018; Expert 6/12/2018. Mid-Discovery Status Conference s et for 2/12/2018 at 08:30 AM in Bakersfield, 510 19th Street before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 6/26/2018; Hearing by 7/24/2018. Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 6/26/2018; Hearing by 8/7/2018. Pretrial Conference set for 10/2/2018 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. Jury Trial set for 11/27/2018 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before Chief 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 SANDY LANGE, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 v. TARGET CORPORATION, Defendants. 14 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1: 17-CV-01131 - LJO - JLT SCHEDULING ORDER1 (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16) Pleading Amendment Deadline: 1/15/2018 Discovery Deadlines: Initial Disclosures: 11/28/2017 Non-Expert: 4/17/2018 Expert: 6/12/2018 Mid-Discovery Status Conference: 2/12/2018 at 8:30 a.m. 16 17 Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filing: 6/26/2018 Hearing: 7/24/2018 18 19 Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filing: 6/26/2018 Hearing: 8/7/2018 20 21 22 Pre-Trial Conference: 10/2/2018 at 8:30 a.m. Courtroom 4 23 24 Trial: 11/27/2018 at 8:30 a.m. Courtroom 4 Jury trial: 2-5 days 25 26 27 28 1 The Court finds the information provided in the Joint Scheduling Report sufficient to schedule the action without a hearing. Therefore, the conference set for November 21, 2017 is VACATED. 1 1 I. Magistrate Judge Consent: 2 Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing 3 Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the newly adopted policy of the Fresno Division of 4 the Eastern District is to trail all civil cases. The parties are hereby notified that for a trial date set 5 before a District Judge, the parties will trail indefinitely behind any higher priority criminal or older 6 civil case set on the same date until a courtroom becomes available. The trial date will not be reset to a 7 continued date. The Magistrate Judges’ availability is far more realistic and accommodating to parties than that 8 9 of the U.S. District Judges who carry the heaviest caseloads in the nation and who must prioritize 10 criminal and older civil cases over more recently filed civil cases. A United States Magistrate Judge 11 may conduct trials, including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of 12 Civil Procedure 73, and Local Rule 305. Any appeal from a judgment entered by a United States 13 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 14 15 States Article III District Court Judges from throughout the nation as Visiting Judges. Pursuant to the 16 Local Rules, Appendix A, such reassignments will be random, and the parties will receive no advance 17 notice before their case is reassigned to an Article III District Court Judge from outside of the Eastern 18 District of California. Therefore, the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to 19 20 conduct all further proceedings, including trial. Within 10 days of the date of this order, counsel 21 SHALL file a consent/decline form (provided by the Court at the inception of this case) indicating 22 whether they will consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. 23 II. Pleading Amendment Deadline Any requested pleading amendments are ordered to be filed, either through a stipulation or 24 25 motion to amend, no later than January 15, 2018. 26 III. 27 28 Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date The parties are ordered to exchange the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) on or before November 28, 2017. 2 The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before April 1 2 17, 2018, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before June 12, 2018. The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, on or before May 1, 2018, 3 4 and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before May 22, 2018. The written designation of retained and 5 non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A), (B), and (C) and 6 shall include all information required thereunder. Failure to designate experts in compliance with 7 this order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other evidence offered through such 8 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 9 10 and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions 11 included in the designation. Failure to comply will result in the imposition of sanctions, which may 12 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 13 14 disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced. A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for February 12, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. before the 15 16 Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, U.S. Magistrate Judge, located at 510 19th Street, Bakersfield, 17 California. Counsel SHALL file a joint mid-discovery status conference report one week before the 18 conference. Counsel also SHALL lodge the status report via e-mail to 19 The joint statement SHALL outline the discovery counsel have completed and that which needs to be 20 completed as well as any impediments to completing the discovery within the deadlines set forth in this 21 order. Counsel may appear via teleconference by dialing (888) 557-8511 and entering Access Code 22 1652736, provided the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Deputy Clerk receives a written notice of the 23 intent to appear telephonically no later than five court days before the noticed hearing date. 24 IV. 25 Pre-Trial Motion Schedule All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later 26 than June 26, 2018, and heard on or before July 24, 2018. Non-dispositive motions are heard before 27 the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, United States Magistrate Judge at the United States Courthouse in 28 Bakersfield, California. 3 No motion to amend or stipulation to amend the case schedule will be entertained unless it 1 2 is filed at least one week before the first deadline the parties wish to extend. Likewise, no written 3 discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the assigned Magistrate Judge. A party 4 with a discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve by 5 agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the moving party promptly 6 shall seek a telephonic hearing with all involved parties and the Magistrate Judge. It shall be the 7 obligation of the moving party to arrange and originate the conference call to the court. To schedule 8 this telephonic hearing, the parties are ordered to contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Susan Hall, at 9 (661) 326-6620 or via email at Counsel must comply with Local Rule 251 10 with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied without prejudice and dropped 11 from the Court’s calendar. Counsel may appear and argue non-dispositive motions via teleconference by dialing (888) 557- 12 13 8511 and entering Access Code 1652736, provided the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Deputy Clerk 14 receives a written notice of the intent to appear telephonically no later than five court days before the 15 noticed hearing date. 16 All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than June 26, 2018, and heard no later 17 than August 7, 2018, in Courtroom 4 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United 18 States District Court Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 19 and Local Rules 230 and 260. 20 V. Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication 21 At least 21 days before filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for summary 22 adjudication, the parties are ORDERED to meet, in person or by telephone, to confer about the issues 23 to be raised in the motion. 24 The purpose of the meeting shall be to: 1) avoid filing motions for summary judgment where a 25 question of fact exists; 2) determine whether the respondent agrees that the motion has merit in whole 26 or in part; 3) discuss whether issues can be resolved without the necessity of briefing; 4) narrow the 27 issues for review by the court; 5) explore the possibility of settlement before the parties incur the 28 expense of briefing a motion; and 6) to develop a joint statement of undisputed facts. 4 The moving party SHALL initiate the meeting and SHALL provide a complete, proposed 1 2 statement of undisputed facts at least five days before the conference. The finalized joint statement of 3 undisputed facts SHALL include all facts that the parties agree, for purposes of the motion, may be 4 deemed true. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260, the moving party shall file the joint 5 statement of undisputed facts. In the notice of motion the moving party SHALL certify that the parties have met and conferred 6 7 as ordered above, or set forth a statement of good cause for the failure to meet and confer. Failure to 8 comply may result in the motion being stricken. 9 VI. Pre-Trial Conference Date 10 October 2, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before Judge O'Neill. 11 The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pretrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2). 12 The parties are further directed to submit a digital copy of their pretrial statement in Word format, 13 directly to Judge O'Neill's chambers, by email at Counsels' attention is directed to Rules 281 and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the 14 15 Eastern District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the pre-trial conference. 16 The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules. In addition to the matters set forth in the 17 Local Rules the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include a Joint Statement of the case to be used by the 18 Court to explain the nature of the case to the jury during voir dire. 19 VII. 20 21 Trial Date November 27, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United States District Court Judge. 22 A. This is a jury trial. 23 B. Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 2-5 days. 24 C. Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of 25 California, Rule 285. 26 VIII. Settlement Conference 27 28 If the parties believe the action is in a settlement posture and a conference with the Court would be fruitful, they may file a joint written request for a scheduling conference, including proposed dates 5 1 for the conference. At that time, a conference will be set with Magistrate Judge Thurston. If any party prefers that the settlement conference be conducted by a different judicial 2 3 officer, that party is directed to notify the Court no later than 60 days in advance of the proposed 4 settlement conference to allow sufficient time for another judicial officer to be assigned to handle the 5 conference. 6 IX. Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other 7 Techniques to Shorten Trial 8 Not applicable at this time. 9 X. There are no pending related matters. 10 11 Related Matters Pending XI. Compliance with Federal Procedure All counsel are expected to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12 13 and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep abreast of any 14 amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to efficiently 15 handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow the Rules as provided 16 in both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of 17 California. 18 XII. 19 Effect of this Order The foregoing order represents the best estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most 20 suitable to dispose of this case. The trial date reserved is specifically reserved for this case. If the 21 parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met, counsel are ordered 22 to notify the court immediately of that fact so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by 23 subsequent status conference. 24 The dates set in this Order are considered to be firm and will not be modified absent a 25 showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. Stipulations 26 extending the deadlines contained herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by 27 affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached exhibits, which establish good cause 28 for granting the relief requested. 6 1 Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 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?