Barker v. Osemwingie et al

Filing 58

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/8/2019 MODIFYING 53 and 56 Scheduling Orders as follows: The deadline for disclosing expert witnesses is 1/25/2019, with any rebuttal experts witness disclosures due by 2/22/2019. Expert discovery shall close on 3/22/2019. In all other respects, the 53 Scheduling Order remains in full force and effect. (Huang, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

XAVIER BECERRA, State Bar No. 118517
Attorney General of California
PETER A. MESHOT, State Bar No. 117061
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
DIANA ESQUIVEL, State Bar No. 202954
Deputy Attorney General
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Osemwingie and Ramiscal

8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

11
12
WILLIAM BARKER,

No. 2:16-cv-03008-JAM-CKD (PC)

13
14
v.
15
16

Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND PROPOSED
ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING
ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERTRELATED DEADLINES

OSEMWINGIE, et al.,

17

Trial Date:
None
Action Filed: April 12, 2017
Defendants.

18
19

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

20

their counsel of record, agree to and request a modification of the November 19, 2018 Order

21

(ECF No. 56) to further extend the expert-related deadlines by twenty-eight days or less. Good

22

cause exists to grant this stipulated request because the parties require more time to disclose

23

expert witnesses.

24

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

25

Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), 16(b)(4); see, e.g., Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975

26

F.2d 604, 609 (describing the factors a court should consider in ruling on such a motion). In

27

considering whether a party moving for a schedule modification has good cause, the Court

28

primarily focuses on the diligence of the party seeking the modification. Johnson, 975 F.2d at
1
Stipulation to Modify Scheduling Order re Expert-Discovery Deadlines and Proposed Order
(2:16-cv-3008 JAM-CKD)

1

609 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee’s notes of 1983 amendment). “The district

2

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

3

party seeking the amendment.’” Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee notes of 1983

4

amendment).
On November 19, 2018, the Court granted the parties’ stipulated request for an extension of

5
6

the expert-related deadlines set out in the initial Scheduling Order, issued on March 26, 2018.

7

(See ECF Nos. 53, 56.) The first request for extension was made on the ground that the parties

8

required more time to conduct expert discovery while they engaged in informal settlement

9

discussions. Since that time, the parties had settlement negotiations but were unable to reach an

10

agreement. Due to the holidays and the unavailability of witnesses, the parties require additional

11

time to disclose expert witnesses and complete expert discovery. Fact discovery is complete.

12

And the parties’ proposed additional extension of the expert-related deadlines will not affect any

13

other scheduling deadline, including the dispositive-motion date set out in the initial March 26,

14

2018 Scheduling Order. For these reasons, the parties agree and request that the initial disclosure

15

of expert witnesses be January 25, 2019; supplement/rebuttal reports be due on February 22,

16

2019; and expert discovery be completed by March 22, 2019.

17

///

18

///

19

///

20

///

21

///

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
2
Stipulation to Modify Scheduling Order re Expert-Discovery Deadlines and Proposed Order
(2:16-cv-3008 JAM-CKD)

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2
3

Dated: January 3, 2019

4

Respectfully submitted,
XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
PETER A. MESHOT
Supervising Deputy Attorney General

5
6
7

/s/ Diana Esquivel

8

DIANA ESQUIVEL
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants Osemwingie and
Ramiscal

9
10
11

Dated: January 3, 2019

Disabled Advocacy Group, APLC

12

/s/ Scottlynn J. Hubbard (as authorized
1/3/19)

13
14

SCOTTLYNN J. HUBBARD
Attorney for Plaintiff William Barker

15
16

SA2017304374
33719241.docx

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Stipulation to Modify Scheduling Order re Expert-Discovery Deadlines and Proposed Order
(2:16-cv-3008 JAM-CKD)

1

[Proposed] ORDER

2

Good cause appearing, the parties’ stipulated request to further modify the expert-related

3

deadlines is GRANTED. The March 26 and November 19, 2018 Orders (ECF Nos. 53, 56) are

4

modified as follows:

5
6
7

The deadline for disclosing expert witnesses is January 25, 2019, with any rebuttal experts
witness disclosures due by February 22, 2019.
Expert discovery shall close on March 22, 2019. Any discovery motions related to expert

8

discovery must be noticed for the hearing to take place by this date and shall be brought in the

9

same manner as motions related to non-expert discovery.

10

In all other respects, the March 26, 2018 Scheduling Order remains in full force and effect.

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12

Dated: January 8, 2019

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16

13:bark3008.stip.2d

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Stipulation to Modify Scheduling Order re Expert-Discovery Deadlines and Proposed Order
(2:16-cv-3008 JAM-CKD)