Pollard v. Sutter et al

Filing 15

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 2/26/14 ORDERING that the Pretrial Scheduling Conference is CONTINUED from 3/3/14 to 3/31/2014 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB) before Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. A further joint status report shall be filed no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the Status Conference, in which Plaintiff shall adequately address the anticipated timing of the referenced amendments.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

ELIZABETH J. POLLARD,

9
10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,

COUNTY OF SUTTER, a public
entity; CARL ADAMS; STEPHANIE
COOPER; and DOES 1-10
INCLUSIVE,
Defendants.
Plaintiff

15

17
18
19
20
21
22

ORDER CONTINUING STATUS
(PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE

v.

14

16

No. 2:13-cv-02460-GEB-AC

states

in

the

JSR,

in

relevant

part,

as

follows:
Plaintiff anticipates a possible joinder
of one party: Mr. Thompson, but Plaintiff has
not yet been able to pursue discovery to
ascertain the facts supporting any claim(s)
against him; if and when she does, she will
have to exhaust her administrative remedies
through a tort claim, then file a motion to
amend the complaint accordingly.
. . . .

25

. . . . There may be later amendment of the
pleadings
to
include
defamation
claims
depending upon what evidence Plaintiff is
able to obtain during discovery based on the
late discovery rules pertaining to defamation
causes of action.

26

(JSR 3:2-14, ECF No. 10.) These statements fail to comply with

27

Plaintiff’s

28

information on when the referenced amendments would be sought.

23
24

obligation

under

Rule

1

16

to

provide

meaningful

1

6

Parties
anticipating
possible
amendments . . . have
an
unflagging
obligation to alert the Rule 16 scheduling
judge of the . . . timing of such anticipated
amendments in their status reports so that
the
judge
can
consider
whether
such
amendments may properly be sought solely
under the Rule 15(a) standard, and whether
structuring
discovery
pertinent
to
the
parties’
decision
whether
to
amend
is
feasible.

7

Jackson v. Laureate, Inc., 186 F.R.D. 605, 608 (E.D. Cal. 1999)

8

(internal quotation marks omitted).

2
3
4
5

9

Therefore, the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference

10

scheduled for hearing on March 3, 2014, is continued to March 31,

11

2014, at 9:00 a.m. A further joint status report shall be filed

12

no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the Status Conference,

13

in

14

timing of the referenced amendments.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

which

Dated:

Plaintiff

shall

adequately

February 26, 2014

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

address

the

anticipated