Passer v. Steevers et al
Filing
112
ORDER AND STAY OF EXPERT DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINES signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/24/14 ORDERING that Discovery shall be phased as set forth; the 9/30/14 expert deposition deadline and the 10/10/14 pretrial motions deadline are STAYED pending further order of the court; within 10 days from the completion of percipient witness and party discovery, counsel for both parties shall contact Sujean Park, ADR and Pro Bono Director, to schedule a mandatory settlement co nference with a randomly selected settlement judge. Absent further leave of court, the mandatory settlement conference shall be scheduled within two months from the date discovery is completed; and the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order on Sujean Park. (cc: ADR). (Meuleman, A) Modified on 9/25/2014 (Meuleman, A).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ANTHONY VINCENT PASSER,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:08-cv-2792 MCE KJN P
v.
DR. STEEVERS, et al.,
15
ORDER AND STAY OF EXPERT
DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL MOTIONS
DEADLINES
Defendants.
16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel. The undersigned has reviewed the
17
18
record in this action and determined that discovery should be phased such that percipient witness
19
depositions and other party discovery should occur prior to the parties engaging in discovery
20
concerning expert witnesses, including the depositions of expert witnesses. Phasing discovery in
21
this case is consistent with Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which states that the
22
rules “should be construed and administered to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive
23
determination of every action and proceeding.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. Moreover, as set forth in the
24
court’s prior order, “[t]he district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase
25
of litigation.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation
26
and internal quotation marks omitted). In light of this phasing, the expert deposition deadline of
27
September 30, 2014, and the pretrial motions deadline of October 10, 2014, are stayed.
28
////
1
1
Once percipient witness and party discovery is completed, this case shall be scheduled for
2
a mandatory settlement conference with a randomly selected judge.1 Within ten days from
3
completion of such discovery, all counsel for the parties shall contact Sujean Park, ADR and Pro
4
Bono Director, (916) 930-4278, to arrange for the scheduling of a settlement conference before a
5
randomly-selected settlement judge. Absent further leave of court, the mandatory settlement
6
conference shall be scheduled within two months from the date such discovery is completed.
7
8
Expert discovery is stayed pending completion of the mandatory settlement conference.
Further scheduling order will issue, as appropriate, following the settlement conference.
9
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
10
1. Discovery shall be phased as set forth above;
11
2. The September 30, 2014 expert deposition deadline and the October 10, 2014 pretrial
12
motions deadline are stayed pending further order of the court;
13
3. Within ten days from the completion of percipient witness and party discovery, counsel
14
for both parties shall contact Sujean Park, ADR and Pro Bono Director, (916) 930-4278, to
15
schedule a mandatory settlement conference with a randomly selected settlement judge. Absent
16
further leave of court, the mandatory settlement conference shall be scheduled within two months
17
from the date discovery is completed; and
18
19
4. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order on Sujean Park.
DATED: September 24, 2014.
20
21
22
23
/pass2792.phdsc
24
25
.
26
27
28
1
Pursuant to Local Rule 270(b) of the Eastern District of California, the parties may
affirmatively request that the undersigned serve as the settlement judge, but must waive any claim
of disqualification to the undersigned trying the case thereafter.
2
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?