Barrera et al v. City of Woodland et al

Filing 64

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 7/20/2021 MODIFYING the 60 Pretrial Scheduling Order such that FRCP 26(a)(2) disclosures shall be made by 8/20/2021, and FRCP 26(a)(2)(c) disclosures shall be made by 9/3/2021. (Coll, A)

Download PDF
Case 2:18-cv-00329-JAM-KJN Document 64 Filed 07/21/21 Page 1 of 3 1 TAYLOR & RING John C. Taylor (SBN 78389) 2 Neil K. Gehlawat (SBN 289388) 3 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 360 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 4 Telephone: 310-209-4100 5 Email: gehlawat@taylorring.com 6 7 8 9 10 THE LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS C. SEABAUGH Thomas C. Seabaugh, Esq. (SBN 272458) 333 South Grand Ave, 42nd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 225-5850 tseabaugh@seabaughfirm.com 11 Attorney for Plaintiffs 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 16 DANIEL BARRERA, et al. CASE NO. 2:18-cv-00329-JAM-KJN 17 JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER ADJUSTING EXPERT DISCLOSURE DEADLINES 18 19 Plaintiffs, vs. 20 CITY OF WOODLAND, et al., 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1- Case No. 2:18-cv-00329-JAM-KJN JOINT STATUS REPORT Case 2:18-cv-00329-JAM-KJN Document 64 Filed 07/21/21 Page 2 of 3 Joint Stipulation 1 2 The parties hereby stipulate to and request an Order modifying the Pretrial Scheduling 3 Order (ECF No. 60) as to expert disclosures only, extending the deadlines by two weeks. 4 A previous stipulation, which was granted, moved the deadlines by two weeks, and this 5 stipulation would add an additional two weeks, bringing the total departure from the original 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 schedule to one month. This proposed change will not affect the September 24, 2021 discovery deadline; the November 5, 2021, dispositive motion filing deadline; or trial set for April 11, 2022. Currently, the parties are required to make Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) expert witness disclosures by August 6, 2021, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(c) supplemental and rebuttal expert witness disclosures by August 20, 2021. The parties propose to move these two deadlines by two weeks, such that Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) disclosures shall be made by August 20, 2021, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(c) disclosures shall be made by September 3, 2021. The requested change is chiefly to accommodate the schedule of a non-party witness, 13 namely the coroner who performed the autopsy on the decedent in this case. This witness resides 14 out of state and has a busy schedule, which the parties wish to accommodate. However, the parties 15 wish to accomplish his deposition before disclosing expert reports. An extension would help the 16 parties avoid causing undue inconvenience or hardship to this third-party witness. The parties 17 submit that good cause exists to grant this extension because the parties agree, no party will be 18 prejudiced, the grounds are reasonable, and because the no other aspect of the pretrial schedule 19 will be affected. 20 // 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- Case No. 2:18-cv-00329-JAM-KJN JOINT STATUS REPORT Case 2:18-cv-00329-JAM-KJN Document 64 Filed 07/21/21 Page 3 of 3 A proposed order is submitted below. 1 2 SO STIPULATED. 3 4 Dated: July 20, 2021 ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF, LLP s/ Derick E. Konz1 By:_________________________________ BRUCE A. KILDAY DERICK E. KONZ Attorneys for Defendants 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dated: July 20, 2021 TAYLOR AND RING; LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS C. SEABAUGH 11 s/ Thomas C. Seabaugh By:_________________________________ NEIL K. GEHLAWAT THOMAS C. SEABAUGH Attorneys for Plaintiffs 12 13 14 15 16 Proposed Order 17 18 19 The Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 60) is modified such that Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) disclosures shall be made by August 20, 2021, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(c) disclosures shall be made by September 3, 2021. 20 SO ORDERED. 21 22 Dated: July 20, 2021 23 /s/ John A. Mendez THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28 1 Authorized via email 7/19/2021 at 1:49 pm. -3- Case No. 2:18-cv-00329-JAM-KJN JOINT STATUS REPORT

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?