U.S. EEOC v. Packaging Corp. of America Central California Corrugated, LLC., et al

Filing 24

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 4/28/2021 SETTING the deadline for completion of Expert Discovery to 9/14/2022. (Coll, A)

6

ROBERTA L. STEELE, SBN 188198 (CA)
MARCIA L. MITCHELL, SBN 18122 (WA)
JAMES H. BAKER, SBN 291836 (CA)
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
San Francisco District Office
450 Golden Gate Ave., 5th Floor West
P.O. Box 36025
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone No. [phone]
Fax No. [phone]
[e-mail]

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff EEOC

1
2
3
4
5

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

DOUGLAS M. EGBERT (SBN 265062)
CHRISTOPHER J. TRUXLER (SBN 282354)
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1600
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone No. [phone]
Fax No. [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Schwarz Partners, LP
And Packaging Corporation of America
Central California Corrugated, LLC.

15
16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18
19

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

20
21

Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No.: 2:20-cv-01948-MCE-CKD
JOINT RULE 26(f) DISCOVERY PLAN;
ORDER EXTENDING EXPERT
DISCOVERY

22
23
24
25
26

PACKAGING CORPORATION OF AMERICA
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA CORRUGATED,
LLC, and SCHWARZ PARTNERS, LP,
Defendants.
Plaintiff U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Defendants

27

Packaging Corporation of America Central California Corrugated, LLC (PCACCC) and Schwarz

28

Partners, LP (Schwarz) (collectively, Defendants), submit this Joint Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan &

JT RULE 26(f) DSC PLAN &
ORDER

1

Case No.: 2:20-CV-01948-MCE

1

[Proposed] Order pursuant to the Court’s Initial Scheduling Order (ECF 3).

2

I.

3

DISCOVERY PLAN
A.

4
5
6
7

In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a), the EEOC and Defendants intend to, and stipulate
to exchanging Initial Disclosures on May 10, 2021.
B.

8
9

What changes should be made in the timing, form, or requirement for
disclosures under Rule 26(a), including a statement of when initial disclosures
were made or will be made.

The subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be
completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or be limited to
or focused on particular issues.

The parties do not believe discovery should be conducted in phases. Without waiving any

10

rights to challenge discoverability, admissibility, or otherwise, the Parties anticipate that discovery

11

will be on those subjects related to Plaintiff’s claims and damages, and Defendants’ defenses,

12

including, but are not limited to the following:

13

Plaintiff

14

1.

15

Allegations/reports of racial harassment at Defendants’ facility located in

McClellan, California (McClellan Facility), and Defendants’ responses to same;

16

2.

The relevant personnel records of employees, managers and Human

17

Resources personnel involved in reports or investigations of racial harassment at the McClellan

18

Facility;

19

3.

The training Defendants provided to their employees, including Human

20

Resources personnel and managers regarding Equal Employment Opportunity laws and policies, and

21

training, guidance or directives related to Title VII;

22

4.

The corporate relationship between Defendants;

23

5.

Charging Parties’ damages; and

24

6.

Relevant company policies, including HR and EEO policies.

25

Defendants

26

1.

27
28

The Charging Parties’ communications with others regarding their
employment and the facts alleged in the First Amended Complaint (FAC); and

2.

JT RULE 26(f) DSC PLAN &
ORDER

Charging Parties’ medical and employment records, both prior to and after the
2

Case No.: 2:20-CV-01948-MCE

1

facts alleged in the FAC.

2
3

Discovery Scheduling
The Court’s Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF 3) sets forth the deadlines for the parties

4

to complete discovery and expert discovery, and to file dispositive motions. The parties calculate

5

those deadlines as follows:

6

EVENT

7

DEADLINE

Deadline to complete non-expert
discovery
Deadline for expert witness
disclosures
Deadline for rebuttal expert
witness disclosures
Joint Trial Readiness Report (if
no dispositive motions are filed)
Dispositive Motions

8
9
10
11
12

April 1, 2022
May 31, 2022
June 30, 2022
August 1, 2022
September 28, 2022

13
14

In addition, the Parties propose that the Court set September 14, 2022, as the deadline for

15

the parties to complete expert discovery. Good cause exists for doing so because 1) the Initial

16

Scheduling Order does not currently address this deadline, 2) the proposed deadline will not affect

17

any other deadlines in the case, and 3) this proposed deadline will encourage the Parties to complete

18

all expert discovery before dispositive motions, thus avoiding the potential for expert discovery to

19

disrupt the dispositive motion briefing schedule.

20

C.

Any issues about disclosure, discovery, or preservation of electronically stored
information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced.

21
22
23

1.

Preservation of ESI

The parties met and conferred pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) regarding reasonable and

24

proportionate steps taken to preserve potentially relevant ESI. The Parties continue to explore the

25

existence of custodians and systems containing ESI. Plaintiff has proposed that the parties enter into

26

an ESI Stipulation and Order. The parties will continue these discussions.

27
28

2.

Discovery and Form of Production

The parties will conduct, serve, and respond to discovery in accordance with the Federal

JT RULE 26(f) DSC PLAN &
ORDER

3

Case No.: 2:20-CV-01948-MCE

1

Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules. Discussions relating to what search and review

2

methodology each party will employ for potentially relevant ESI are ongoing. The EEOC provided

3

Defendants with its written specifications to produce discovery in accordance with industry

4

standards for the Relativity platform. The parties are meeting and conferring concerning the form of

5

Defendants’ production, and to the nature and extent of the E-discovery to be completed ahead of

6

ADR.

7

D.

8
9
10

1.

11
12

Any issues about claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation
materials, including – if the parties agree on a procedure to assert these claims
after production – whether to ask the court to include their agreement in an
order under Federal Rule of Evidence 502.
Preservation of ESI

The parties agree and stipulate that the following categories of documents shall be excluded
from privilege logs:

13

Attorney-client privilege:

14

(a)

15

Communications between Defendants’ in-house or outside counsel (or
among them) that post-date the filing of the Complaint;

16

(b)

Communications between Defendants’ in-house or outside counsel

17

(and Defendants’ management personnel) that post-date the filing of

18

Mr. Calloway’s Charge of Discrimination (which includes

19

communications in reference to Mr. Damon Douglas or Mr. Lyles that

20

post-date Mr. Calloway’s Charge);

21

(c)

22

Communications between EEOC employees and Mr. Calloway, Mr.
Lyles or Mr. Damon Douglas after September 28, 2019; and

23

(d)

Communications between or amongst EEOC enforcement (i.e.

24

investigation) staff and EEOC legal staff that post-date the filing of

25

Mr. Calloway’s Charge of Discrimination (which includes

26

communications in reference to Mr. Douglas or Mr. Lyles that post-

27

date Mr. Calloway’s Charge).

28

///

JT RULE 26(f) DSC PLAN &
ORDER

4

Case No.: 2:20-CV-01948-MCE

1

Attorney work product:

2

(a)

Documents created by Defendants’ outside or in-house counsel that
post-date the filing of Mr. Calloway’s Charge of Discrimination; and

3
4

(b)

Documents created by EEOC attorneys that post-date the filing of

5

Mr. Calloway’s Charge of Discrimination (which includes documents

6

created in reference to Mr. Lyles or Mr. Douglas that post-date

7

Mr. Calloway’s Charge).

8
9

2.

Fed. R. Evid. 502(d) Inadvertent Productions

The parties are meeting and conferring regarding a Fed. R. Evid. 502(d) Stipulation and

10

Order and the treatment of inadvertently produced documents. In accordance with Fed. R. Evid.

11

502(d), the parties do stipulate that the production of privileged or work-product protected

12

documents or electronically stored information, whether inadvertent or otherwise, is not a waiver of

13

the privilege or protection from discovery in this case or in any other federal or state proceeding.

14

The parties further agree that this stipulation shall be interpreted to provide the maximum protection

15

allowed by Fed. R. Evid. 502(d).

16

E.

17
18

What changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under
these rules or by local rule, and what other limitations should be imposed.

The parties agree that it would be beneficial to engage in early ADR through private

19

mediation after targeted discovery. The parties agree to limit discovery to written discovery until the

20

completion of ADR and agree that each party shall serve no more than 35 separate requests for

21

production of documents prior to completing ADR. The parties do not currently anticipate seeking

22

other discovery limitations. The parties agree to meet and confer, and attempt to achieve a joint

23

resolution, regarding all discovery disputes before seeking judicial intervention.

24
25
26
27
28

The parties continue to meet and confer concerning the collection and format of ESI
produced in discovery. There are no current discovery disputes.
F.

Any other orders that the court should issue under Rule 26(c) or under Rule
16(b) and (c).

None at this time.

JT RULE 26(f) DSC PLAN &
ORDER

5

Case No.: 2:20-CV-01948-MCE

1

II.

SETTLEMENT AND ADR

2

The parties are willing to participate in private mediation following limited and tailored

3

discovery, the scope and nature of which is being negotiated. The parties anticipate completing

4

ADR by September 30, 2021.

5

[PROPOSED] ORDER

6

Therefore, the Parties hereby stipulate to and request that the Court order the following relief:

7

1.

8

Respectfully Submitted,

The deadline to complete expert discovery shall be September 14, 2022.

9
Dated: April 22, 2021

/s/ James H. Baker
James H. Baker
Trial Attorney
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dated: Authorized on April 22, 2021

/s/ Douglas Egbert
Douglas Egbert
Partner
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
Attorneys for Defendants

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

ORDER
In accordance with the foregoing stipulation of the Parties, and good cause appearing, the
deadline for completion of expert discovery shall be September 14, 2022.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 28, 2021

23
24
25
26
27
28
JT RULE 26(f) DSC PLAN &
ORDER

6

Case No.: 2:20-CV-01948-MCE