Cordero v. Guzman et al

Filing 141

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 03/09/17 the expert witness the disclosure deadlines are CONTINUED as follows: Designation of Expert Witnesses due by 4/11/2017 with any supplemental/rebuttal disclosures due 05/05/17. The 06/02/17 deadline for completion of expert discovery shall remain in full force and effect. (Benson, A)

1

8

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
Kala Sherman-Presser (CA Bar No. 302591)
[e-mail]
Meryn C. N. Grant (CA Bar No. 291315)
[e-mail]
Tyler P. Young (CA Bar No. 291041)
[e-mail]
Christopher J. Soper (CA Bar No. 307500)
[e-mail]
Caroline N. Esser (CA Bar No. 307745)
[e-mail]
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

9

Attorneys for Plaintiff Randy M. Cordero

2
3
4
5
6
7

10
11
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

14
15
RANDY M. CORDERO,

Case No. 2:13-cv-01551 JAM-KJN

16
Plaintiff,
17

STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE
EXPERT WITNESS DISCLOSURE
DEADLINES AND ORDER

v.
18
NICK GUZMAN, et al.
19
Defendant.
20
21

Trial Date: July 24, 2017
Action Filed: July 16, 2013

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS
DISCLOSURE DEADLINES
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-01551-JAM-KJN

1

Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Local Rule 143, the parties, through

2

their respective counsel of record, agree to and request a continuance of the expert witness

3

disclosure and the supplemental and rebuttal expert disclosure deadlines in the above-captioned

4

matter. As set forth below, good cause exists to grant this stipulated request because both

5

parties’ require additional time to complete expert discovery.

6

A scheduling order may be modified upon a showing of good cause and by leave of

7

Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th

8

Cir. 1992). In considering whether a party moving for a schedule modification has good cause,

9

the court primarily focuses on the diligence of the party seeking the modification. Johnson, 975

10

F.2d at 609 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee note to 1983 amendment). “The

11

district court may modify the pretrial schedule ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the

12

diligence of the party seeking the amendment.’” Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory

13

committee notes of 1983 amendment). The Court may also consider the prejudice to the party

14

opposing the modification. Id.

15

Good cause exists to grant this stipulated request because, due to weather conditions and

16

other existing conflicts, the deposition of Defendant Guzman, which was originally scheduled for

17

March 8, 2017, was continued until March 21, 2017. Both parties’ expert witnesses require time

18

to review the deposition transcript and incorporate any relevant information into their expert

19

reports. Further, the parties are in the process of arranging for Plaintiff’s forensics expert to

20

conduct a site visit of High Desert State Prison in late March. This will also produce relevant

21

evidence for the experts’ consideration. The parties therefore agree that additional time is

22

necessary for expert witness disclosures. Extending these deadlines will not impact any other

23

pre-trial deadlines or delay the trial date.

24

Pursuant to the Court’s December 20, 2016 Order, the deadline for expert witness

25

disclosures is March 28, 2017, and the deadline for supplemental and rebuttal expert disclosures

26

is April 28, 2017. Dkt. No. 133. All expert discovery must be completed by no later than June

27

2, 2017. Dkt. No. 135.

28

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

The parties request that the expert witness disclosure deadline be extended until April 11,
1

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS
DISCLOSURE DEADLINES
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-01551-JAM-KJN

1

2017, and the deadline for supplemental and rebuttal expert disclosures be extended until May 5,

2

2017. The June 2, 2017 deadline for completion of expert discovery will remain the same.

3
4
5

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: March 8, 2017

Respectfully submitted,
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

6
7
8
9
10

By: /s/ Kala Sherman-Presser
Kala Sherman-Presser
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Randy M. Cordero
ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE

11
12
13
14

By: /s/ Diana Esquivel (as authorized on March 8, 2017)
Diana Esquivel
Attorneys for Defendant
Nick Guzman

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

2

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS
DISCLOSURE DEADLINES
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-01551-JAM-KJN

1

ORDER

2

Good cause appearing, the parties’ stipulated request to continue the expert witness

3
4
5
6
7
8

disclosure deadlines is GRANTED.
Expert witness disclosures shall be made by April 11, 2017 and supplemental disclosure
and disclosure of any rebuttal experts shall be made by May 5, 2017.
The June 2, 2017 deadline for completion of expert discovery shall remain in full force
and effect.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10
11

Date: 3/9/2017

/s/ John A. Mendez_____________
John A. Mendez
United States District Court Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

3

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE EXPERT WITNESS
DISCLOSURE DEADLINES
CASE NO. 2:13-CV-01551-JAM-KJN