Johnson v. Shaffer et al

Filing 44

ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 3/31/2014 ORDERING 40 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS are ADOPTED in full; 29 Motion to Certify Class is GRANTED; 30 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as provided in th is Order; Status Conference SET for 5/1/2014 at 02:30 PM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Parties shall confer and, at least seven days prior to the status conference, file a Joint StatusReport that includes the Rule 26(f) disco very plan, with all named parties participating in the preparation and completion of the report. The court, upon review of the joint status report and following the status conference, will issue a scheduling order governing the future course of the l itigation. In the extraordinary event the parties are not able to file a joint status report, each party must file an individual status report and attach a declaration setting forth, in detail, the extraordinary circumstances that prevented the parties from filing a joint status report.(Waggoner, D)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SAM JOHNSON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:12-cv-1059 KJM AC

v.

ORDER

JENNIFER SHAFFER, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The

17
18

matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)

19

and Local Rule 302.
On November 1, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which

20
21

were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the

22

findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Defendants have filed

23

objections to the findings and recommendations to which plaintiff has filed a reply.

24

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

25

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court

26

finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

27

Given the nature of the action as a class action, with plaintiff represented by counsel, the court

28

/////
1

1

withdraws the reference to the magistrate judge, and sets the matter for a status conference. See

2

L.R. 101, 240(c), 302.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1.

The findings and recommendations filed November 1, 2013 are adopted in full.

5

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for class certification (ECF No. 29) is granted.

6

3.

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 30) is granted in part and

7

denied in part as follows:

8

a. Granted as to plaintiff’s equal protection and pendent state law claims;

9

b. Denied as to plaintiff’s due process claims insofar as defendants rely on

10

Swarthout v. Cooke, ___ U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 859 (2011); and

11
12
13

c. Denied in all other respects without prejudice to renewal following close of
discovery.
4.

A Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is set for May 1, 2014 at 2:30 P.M.

14

before the undersigned in Courtroom Three. All parties to the action shall appear in person at the

15

Status Conference through lead counsel or on their own behalf if acting without counsel.

16

Requests for a continuance of the status conference are not favored and will not be granted in the

17

absence of a true emergency and, in any event, will not be entertained unless made in writing at

18

least FIVE (5) DAYS prior to the scheduled conference.

19

5.

At least twenty−one (21) calendar days before the Status Conference is held,

20

parties shall confer as contemplated by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and Local Rule

21

240(b). The parties shall submit, at least seven (7) days prior to the Status Conference, a Joint

22

Status Report that includes the Rule 26(f) discovery plan, with all named parties participating in

23

the preparation and completion of the report. The status report shall address the following

24

matters:

25
26

(a) a brief summary of the claims and legal theories under which recovery is
sought or liability is denied;

27

(b) status of service upon all defendants and cross−defendants;

28

(c) possible joinder of additional parties;
2

1

(d) contemplated amendments to the pleadings, including to simplify or clarify the

2

issues and eliminate previous claims and defenses;

3

(e) the statutory bases for jurisdiction and venue;

4

(f) anticipated discovery and the scheduling of discovery, including:

5

(1) what changes, if any, should be made in the timing, form, or

6

requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a), including a statement as to when

7

disclosures under Rule 26(a)(1) were made or will be made, and whether further

8

discovery conferences should be held;

9

(2) the subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should

10

be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases;

11

(3) what changes, if any, should be made in the limitations on discovery 27

12

imposed under the Civil Rules and what other limitations, if any, should be

13

imposed;

14

(4) the timing of the disclosure of expert witnesses and information

15

required by Rule 26(a)(2); and

16

(5) proposed dates for discovery cut−off.

17

(g) contemplated dispositive or other motions and a proposed date by which all

18

non−discovery motions shall be heard;

19

(h) methods that can be used from the outset to avoid unnecessary proof and

20

cumulative evidence, and anticipated limitations or restrictions on the use of testimony

21

under Federal Rule of Evidence 702;

22

(i) a proposed date for final pretrial conference;

23

(j) a proposed date for trial, estimated number of days of trial, and whether any

24

party has demanded a jury;

25

(k) appropriateness of special procedures such as reference to a special master or

26

agreement to try the matter before the assigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

27

636(c);

28

/////
3

1
2

(l) proposed modification of standard pretrial procedures because of the simplicity
or complexity of the case;

3
4

(m) whether the case is related to any other case pending in this district, including
the bankruptcy court of this district;

5

(n) optimal timing and method for settlement discussions, including whether a

6

court−convened settlement conference should be scheduled, whether in the case of a jury

7

trial the parties will stipulate to the trial judge acting as a settlement judge, and the parties'

8

positions with respect to Voluntary Dispute Resolution (VDRP) as required by Local Rule

9

271(d); and

10

(o) any other matters that may be conducive to the just and expeditious 19

11

disposition of the case.

12

6.

The court, upon review of the joint status report and following the status

13

conference, will issue a scheduling order governing the future course of the litigation. Counsel

14

are directed to read that order carefully once it is issued. Requests to modify or vacate any date

15

set forth in the order will not be favored and will not be granted absent good cause.

16

7.

In the extraordinary event the parties are not able to file a joint status report, each

17

party must file an individual status report and attach a declaration setting forth, in detail, the

18

extraordinary circumstances that prevented the parties from filing a joint status report.

19

DATED: March 31, 2014.

20
21
22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
4