Leonhart v. C R Bard Inc et al

Filing 48

ORDER to Extend Stay of Discovery and all Pretrial Deadlines signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/1/2020. Initial Scheduling Conference Continued to 3/2/2021 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe.(Sant Agata, S)

1 Shawtina F. Lewis (SBN 259255)
[e-mail]
2 NELSON MULLINS RILEY &
SCARBOROUGH LLP
3 19191 South Vermont Avenue, Suite 900
Torrance, CA 90502
4 Telephone:
424.221.7400
Facsimile:
424.221.7499
5
Attorneys for Defendants
6 C. R. Bard, Inc. and
7 Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

N ELSO N M ULLINS R IL EY & S CARBOROUGH
A TTORNEYS AT L AW
L OS A NGELE S

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9
LLP

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

TOM LEONHART,

11
12

Plaintiff,
JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY
OF DISCOVERY AND ALL
PRETRIAL DEADLINES & ORDER

v.

13

C. R. BARD INC., and
14 BARD PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INC.,
15

Case No.: 1:20-cv-01677-DAD-BAM

(Doc. No. 47.)

Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF DISCOVERY AND ALL PRETRIAL DEADLINES
& ORDER

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and (d), Plaintiff in the above-titled

2

action and Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (collectively, “Bard”)

3

(Plaintiff and Bard are collectively referred to herein as “the Parties”), respectfully request that

4

this Court extend the temporary stay of discovery and all pretrial deadlines and continue the initial

5

Scheduling Conference in this case until March 2, 2021 while the Parties continue settlement

6

discussions. In support thereof, the Parties state as follows:

7

1.

This case was originally filed in the State Court of Dallas County, Texas, by a Texas

N ELSO N M ULLINS R IL EY & S CARBOROUGH
A TTORNEYS AT L AW
L OS A NGELE S

resident serving as lead plaintiff, and joined multiple individual plaintiffs, including the instant

9
LLP

8

plaintiff. The case was subsequently removed by Bard to the United States District Court for the

10
11

Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.
2.

On August 20, 2020, the Court issued an Order granting the lead plaintiff’s

12

Unopposed Motion to Sever and Transfer Venue of Out-of-State Plaintiff’s Cases, and the case

13

was transferred to this District and assigned to this Court. (Doc. 27.)

14

3.

On September 15, 2020, this Court found good cause to grant the parties’ previous

15

motion to stay all discovery pretrial deadlines in this action and continue the initial scheduling

16

conference to December 9, 2020 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM). (Doc. 45.) The Parties

17

continue to engage in serious settlement discussions in an effort to reach a global resolution of an

18

entire inventory of cases, which consists of over 700 cases. Accordingly, the Parties jointly move

19

this Court for an order extending the staying of all discovery and pretrial deadlines and continuing

20

the initial Scheduling Conference in this case until March 2, 2021 to allow the Parties to continue

21

to engage in settlement discussions. This will further facilitate settlement discussions and prevent

22

unnecessary expenditures of the parties and judicial resources.

23

4.

A district court has broad discretion over pretrial discovery rulings. See, e.g.,

24

Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 598 (1998); accord Thermal Design, Inc. v. Am. Soc’y of

25

Heating, Refrigerating & Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 755 F.3d 832, 837 (7th Cir. 2014);

26

Burns v. EGS Fin. Care, Inc., No. 4:15-CV-06173-DGK, 2016 WL 7535365 at *1 (W.D. Mo. Apr.

27

12, 2016); see also Cook v. Kartridg Pak Co., 840 F.2d 602, 604 (8th Cir. 1988) (“A district court

28

must be free to use and control pretrial procedure in furtherance of the orderly administration of
1
JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF DISCOVERY AND ALL PRETRIAL DEADLINES
& ORDER

1

justice.”); see also CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962) (district courts possess

2

“inherent power to control the disposition of the causes on its docket in a manner which will

3

promote economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants”).

4

5.

Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(c) and 26(d), a court may limit the scope

negotiations do not automatically excuse a party from its discovery obligations, the parties can

7

seek a stay prior to the cutoff date. See Sofo v. Pan-American Life Ins. Co., 13 F.3d 239, 242 (7th

8

Cir. 1994); Wichita Falls Office Assocs. V. Banc One Corp., 978 F.2d 915, 918 (5th Cir. 1993)

9
N ELSO N M ULLINS R IL EY & S CARBOROUGH
A TTORNEYS AT L AW
L OS A NGELE S

of discovery or control its sequence.

6

LLP

5

(finding that a “trial judge’s decision to curtail discovery is granted great deference,” and noting

10

that the discovery had been pushed back a number of times because of pending settlement

11

negotiations).

12

6.

See Britton, 523 U.S. at 598.

Although settlement

The Parties agree that the relief sought herein is necessary to handle the case in the

13

most economical fashion, yet allow sufficient time to schedule and complete discovery if

14

necessary, consistent with the scheduling obligations of counsel. The relief sought in this Motion

15

is not being requested for delay, but so that justice may be done.

16

WHEREFORE, The Parties jointly request that the stay of discovery and all pretrial

17

deadlines be extended and that the initial Scheduling Conference be continued until March 2, 2021

18

to allow the Parties to conduct ongoing settlement negotiations.

19

[Signatures on the following page]

20

//

21

//

22

//

23

//

24

//

25

//

26

//

27

//

28

//
2
JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF DISCOVERY AND ALL PRETRIAL DEADLINES
& ORDER

1
DATED: November 24, 2020

Respectfully submitted,

2
NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP
3
4

/s/ Shawtina F. Lewis
Shawtina F. Lewis (SBN 259255)
19191 South Vermont Avenue, Suite 900
Torrance, CA 90502
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 424.221.7499
[e-mail]
Attorney for Defendants
C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

5
6
7
8
9
N ELSO N M ULLINS R IL EY & S CARBOROUGH
A TTORNEYS AT L AW
L OS A NGELE S

LLP

DATED: November 24, 2020

Respectfully submitted,

10
FEARS NACHAWATI LAW FIRM
11
12
13
14

/s/ Steven Schulte (as authorized on 11/24/2020)
Steven Schulte (admitted pro hac vice)
5473 Blair Road
Dallas, Texas 75231
T: [phone]/F: [phone]
[e-mail]

15
16

Attorneys for Plaintiff

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF DISCOVERY AND ALL PRETRIAL DEADLINES
& ORDER

1

ORDER

DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES, and for good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY

4

ORDERED that the Parties’ Motion is GRANTED. All discovery and all pretrial deadlines are

5

hereby stayed and extended until the Initial Scheduling Conference. The Initial Scheduling

6

Conference is continued to March 2, 2021, at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before

7

Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe to allow the Parties to conduct ongoing settlement

8

negotiations. The parties shall file a Joint Scheduling Report at least one (1) full week prior to the

9
N ELSO N M ULLINS R IL EY & S CARBOROUGH
A TTORNEYS AT L AW
L OS A NGELE S

Upon consideration of the Parties’ JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF

3

LLP

2

Scheduling Conference. The parties shall appear at the Scheduling Conference with each party

10

connecting remotely either via Zoom video conference or Zoom telephone number. The parties

11

shall be provided with the Zoom ID and password by the Courtroom Deputy prior to the

12

conference. The Zoom ID number and password are confidential and are not to be shared.

13

Appropriate court attire required.

14
15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

December 1, 2020

/s/ Barbara

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF DISCOVERY AND ALL PRETRIAL DEADLINES
& ORDER