Kaur et al v. City of Lodi et al

Filing 129

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 11/25/2015 REFERRING 110 , 111 , 112 and 121 Motions seeking sanctions to the Assigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rules. The remaining portions of each motion is DENIED under the ripeness doctrine. (Donati, J)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8
9
10

SUKHWINDER KAUR, individually
and as the successor in
interest for the Decedent
PARMINDER SINGH SHERGILL;
KULBINDER KAUR SOHOTA;
SARABJIT SINGH SHERGILL,

v.

12

14
15
16
17
18

CITY OF LODI; CITY OF LODI
POLICE DEPARTMENT; MARK
HELMS, in his individual
capacity as the Chief of
Police for the City of Lodi;
SCOTT BRATTON, in his
individual capacity as a City
of Lodi Police Officer; ADAM
LOCKIE, in his individual
capacity as a City of Lodi
Police Officer,
Defendants.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

ORDER

Plaintiffs,

11

13

No. 2:14-cv-00828-GEB-AC

On November 2, 2015, and November 16, 2015, Plaintiffs
filed motions each of which was noticed for hearing before the
undersigned district judge and seeks sanctions under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 37(c)(1). (ECF Nos. 110, 111, 112,
121.)

However,

Local

Rule

302(c)(1)

prescribes

that

“[a]ll

discovery motions, including Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 motions” are
referred to the assigned magistrate judge. E.D. Cal. Local Rule
302(c)(1)

(emphasis

added).

Therefore,

28
1

this

portion

of

each

1

motion

2

undersigned district judge and instead should be re-noticed for

3

hearing before the assigned magistrate judge. The remainder of

4

each motion has not been shown ripe for judicial decision in

5

light of Plaintiffs’ position in their Rule 37(c)(1) motion that

6

expert

7

witnesses

8

failure to comply with Rule 26(a)(2). Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)

9

(governing the disclosure of expert testimony). Therefore, the

10

remaining portion of each motion is denied under the ripeness

11

doctrine.

12

Dated:

should

not

reports
should

have

should
be

been

be

noticed

stricken

excluded,

or

because

November 25, 2015

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

for

hearing

precluded,
of

before

and

Defendants’

the

expert
alleged