Valdez v Unknown
SECOND AMENDED RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by District Judge David A. Ezra on 8/29/11: Jury Trial is SET for 3/13/2012 at 09:00 AM, and the Final Pretrial Conference is SET for 2/8/2012 at 09:00 AM before District Judge David A. Ezra. Seperate pre-trial statement are due BY 2/1/2012. Motions in limine shall be filed BY 2/13/2012, and Opposition to motions shall be filed BY 2/20/2012. All motions not otherwise provided in this order shall be filed BY 10/26/2011. Plaintiff's disclosure of non-expert witnesses shall be filed BY 10/19/2011, and defendants' disclosure of non-expert witnesses shall be filed BY 10/26/2011. Plaintiff's Designation of Expert Witnesses is due BY 10/26/2011, and defendants' Designation of Expert Witnesses is due BY 11/2/2011. The discovery deadline shall BE 12/16/2011. (Kastilahn, A)
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
) Case No. 2:08-cv-1978 DAE
) SECOND AMENDED RULE 16
) SCHEDULING ORDER
WALKER, GUFFEE, and VORON,
SECOND AMENDED RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER
Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 16(b)(1) and
the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
California, LR 240(a), the Court enters this scheduling order to reflect the trial date
and other deadlines.
The Parties are NOTIFIED that all pretrial proceedings will be
conducted by telecommunications technologies to allow Plaintiff to remain in the
penal institution. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(f). At the court’s discretion, hearings
may be conducted in the institution, subject to institution officials’ agreement. Id.
When practicable, counsel shall be allowed to participate by telecommunications
technology when any pretrial proceeding is held in the prison.
TRIAL AND CONFERENCE SCHEDULING:
Jury trial in this matter will commence before the Honorable David
Alan Ezra, United States District Judge on March 13, 2012, at 9:00 a.m.
A final pre-trial conference shall be held on February 8, 2012, at 9:00
a.m. before the Honorable David Alan Ezra, United States District Judge.
Pursuant to LR 281, each party herein shall serve and file a separate
pre-trial statement by February 1, 2012.
All motions to join additional parties or to amend the pleadings shall
be filed by [CLOSED].
When defendants rely on the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust
prison administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), defendants shall
file a dispositive motion to that effect, or notify the Court that they are waiving this
defense and will not be filing such a motion, by [CLOSED].
Motions in limine shall be filed February 13, 2012. Opposition
memoranda to a motion in limine shall be filed by February 20, 2012.
All motions not otherwise provided for herein shall be filed by
October 26, 2011.
Unless otherwise ordered by the court, each party shall file only one
motion for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Leave to file additional
motions for summary judgment may be granted by the Court when it does not
appear that other rules will be circumvented.
Motions deadlines will be strictly enforced. After the deadline has
passed, the parties may not file such motions except with leave of this Court, with
good cause shown.
The Court elects not to apply the initial disclosure requirements of
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) to this matter.
Each party shall serve and file a disclosure of all non-expert witnesses
reasonably expected to be called at trial according to the following schedule:
Plaintiff shall comply by October 19, 2011.
Defendants shall comply by October 26, 2011.
The disclosure of non-expert witnesses shall include the full name,
address, and telephone number of each witness, and a short summary of anticipated
testimony. If certain required information is not available, the disclosure shall so
state. Each party shall be responsible for updating its disclosures as such
information becomes available. The duty to update such disclosure shall continue
up to and including the date that trial herein actually terminates.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2), each party shall disclose to each
other party the identity and written report of any person who may be used at trial to
present expert evidence under Rules 702, 703, or 705 of the Federal Rules of
Evidence, according to the following schedule:
Plaintiff shall comply by October 26, 2011.
Defendants shall comply by November 2, 2011.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(3) and LR 440, the discovery
deadline shall be December 16, 2011. Unless otherwise permitted by the Court, all
discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26-37 inclusive must be completed by the
discovery deadline. Unless otherwise permitted by the Court, all discovery
motions and conferences made or requested pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26-37
inclusive and LR 250.2 and 251 shall be heard by the discovery deadline. While
Fed. R. Civ. P. 29 allows the parties to extend certain discovery deadlines by
agreement, such stipulations do not, without prior Court order, extend the Court’s
obligation to adjudicate discovery disputes.
The parties shall be ON CALL for a settlement conference before the
Honorable David Alan Ezra, United States District Judge.
If a settlement conference is scheduled, each party shall deliver to the
presiding Judge a confidential settlement conference statement by one week prior
to the scheduled conference. Parties are directed to LR 270(d) for the requirements
of the confidential settlement conference statement.
Unless otherwise ordered by the Court prior to the date of the
settlement conference, each party or the party’s representative having full authority
to negotiate and settle the case on terms proposed by the opposing party shall
appear at the settlement conference, either in person, or for pro se prisoners, by
telephone. Counsel may appear as a party’s representative provided counsel
produces for the Court full written authority from the party to negotiate and settle
the case on terms proposed by the opposing party without further consultations
with the party.
This order shall continue in effect unless and until amended by
subsequent order of the Court.
Parties are reminded that failure to comply with this Order may result
in sanctions, up to and including the sanction of dismissal or entry of default.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, August 29, 2011.
David Alan Ezra
United States District Judge
Valdez v. Correctional Officers Walker, et al., Case No. 2:08-cv-1978 DAE;
Second Amended Rule 16 Scheduling Order
NOTICE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS
During the course of this litigation, defendants may make a motion for
summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A
motion for summary judgment will, if granted, end your case. Rule 56 tells you
what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary judgment. Generally,
summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material fact
- that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of
your case, the party who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law.
When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment
that is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot
simply rely on what your complaint says. You must set forth specific facts in
declarations, depositions, answers to interrogatories, or authenticated documents,
as provided in Rule 56(e), contradicting the facts shown in the defendant’s
declarations and documents and showing that there is a genuine issue of material
fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary
judgment, if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is
granted, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.
All parties, pro se or not, must comply with the Local Rules of the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Local Rule 260
sets out the local requirements for summary judgment motions and oppositions to
such motions. To oppose a motion, you must file a concise statement that accepts
the facts set forth in the moving parties’ concise statement, or sets forth all material
facts to which it is contended there exists a genuine issue necessary to be litigated.
When preparing the separate concise statement, you must reference only the
material facts that are absolutely necessary for the court to determine the limited
issues presented in the motion for summary judgment (and no others), and each
reference shall contain a citation to a particular affidavit, deposition, or other
document that supports your interpretation of the material fact. Documents
referenced in the concise statement shall not be filed in their entirety. Instead, you
shall extract and highlight only the relevant portions of each referenced document.
Photocopies of extracted pages, with appropriate identification and highlighting
will be adequate. The concise statement shall be no longer than five (5) pages.
When resolving motions for summary judgment, the court has no independent duty
to search and consider any part of the court record not otherwise referenced in the
separate concise statement. If necessary, you may request further guidance from
the court regarding the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and LR 260.
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?