Ibrahim v. Department of Homeland et al
Filing
397
COURT NOTICE AND PROPOSED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 12/18/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix)(whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2012)
1
2
PROPOSED CMO – DECEMBER 18, 2012
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
RAHINAH IBRAHIM, an individual,
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
No. C 06-00545 WHA
Plaintiff,
v.
12
13
FIRST AMENDED CASE
MANAGEMENT ORDER
AFTER REMAND AND
REFERENCE TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR
MEDIATION/SETTLEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY, et al.,
14
Defendants.
/
15
16
After a case management conference, the Court enters the following order pursuant to
17
Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) and Civil Local Rule 16-10:
18
1.
All initial disclosures under FRCP 26 must be completed or updated by
19
JANUARY 9, 2013, on pain of preclusion under FRCP 37(c), including full and faithful
20
compliance with FRCP 26(a)(1)(A)(iii).
21
2.
Leave to add any new parties or pleading amendments must be sought by
22
JANUARY 31, 2013.
23
3.
The non-expert discovery cut-off date shall be JULY 31, 2013.
4.
The last date for designation of expert testimony and disclosure of full expert reports
24
25
under FRCP 26(a)(2) as to any issue on which a party has the burden of proof
26
(“opening reports”) shall be JULY 31, 2013. Within FOURTEEN CALENDAR DAYS of said
27
deadline, all other parties must disclose any expert reports on the same issue
28
1
(“opposition reports”). Within SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS thereafter, the party with the
2
burden of proof must disclose any reply reports rebutting specific material in opposition
3
reports. Reply reports must be limited to true rebuttal and should be very brief. They
4
should not add new material that should have been placed in the opening report and the
5
reply material will ordinarily be reserved for the rebuttal or sur-rebuttal phase of the trial.
6
If the party with the burden of proof neglects to make a timely disclosure, the other side,
7
if it wishes to put in expert evidence on the same issue anyway, must disclose its expert
8
report within the fourteen-day period. In that event, the party with the burden of proof on
9
the issue may then file a reply expert report within the seven-day period, subject to
possible exclusion for “sandbagging” and, at all events, any such reply material may be
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
presented at trial only after, if at all, the other side actually presents expert testimony to
12
which the reply is responsive. The cutoff for all expert discovery shall be
13
FOURTEEN CALENDAR DAYS
14
opposition or reply report, a responding party may depose the adverse expert sufficiently
15
before the deadline for the opposition or reply report so as to use the testimony in
16
preparing the response. Experts must make themselves readily available for such
17
depositions. Alternatively, the responding party can elect to depose the expert later in the
18
expert-discovery period. An expert, however, may be deposed only once unless the
19
expert is used for different opening and/or opposition reports, in which case the expert
20
may be deposed independently on the subject matter of each report. At least
21
28 CALENDAR DAYS before the due date for opening reports, each party shall serve a list
22
of issues on which it will offer any expert testimony in its case-in-chief (including from
23
non-retained experts). This is so that all parties will be timely able to obtain
24
counter-experts on the listed issues and to facilitate the timely completeness of all expert
25
reports. Failure to so disclose may result in preclusion.
26
5.
after the deadline for reply reports. In aid of preparing an
As to damages studies, the cut-off date for past damages will be as of the expert report
27
(or such earlier date as the expert may select). In addition, the experts may try to project
28
future damages (i.e., after the cut-off date) if the substantive standards for future damages
2
1
can be met. With timely leave of Court or by written stipulation, the experts may update
2
their reports (with supplemental reports) to a date closer to the time of trial.
3
6.
At trial, the direct testimony of experts will be limited to the matters disclosed in their
4
reports. Omitted material may not ordinarily be added on direct examination.
5
This means the reports must be complete and sufficiently detailed.
6
Illustrative animations, diagrams, charts and models may be used on direct examination
7
only if they were part of the expert’s report, with the exception of simple drawings and
8
tabulations that plainly illustrate what is already in the report, which can be drawn by the
9
witness at trial or otherwise shown to the jury. If cross-examination fairly opens the
door, however, an expert may go beyond the written report on cross-examination and/or
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
redirect examination. By written stipulation, of course, all sides may relax these
12
requirements. For trial, an expert must learn and testify to the full amount of billing and
13
unbilled time by him or his firm on the engagement.
14
7.
To head off a recurring problem, experts lacking percipient knowledge should avoid
15
vouching for the credibility of witnesses, i.e., whose version of the facts in dispute is
16
correct. This means that they may not, for example, testify that based upon a review of
17
fact depositions and other material supplied by counsel, a police officer did (or did not)
18
violate standards. Rather, the expert should be asked for his or her opinion based —
19
explicitly — upon an assumed fact scenario. This will make clear that the witness is not
20
attempting to make credibility and fact findings and thereby to invade the province of the
21
jury. Of course, a qualified expert can testify to relevant customs, usages, practices,
22
recognized standards of conduct, and other specialized matters beyond the ken of a lay
23
jury. This subject is addressed further in the trial guidelines referenced in paragraph 15
24
below.
25
8.
Counsel need not request a motion hearing date and may notice non-discovery motions
26
for any Thursday (excepting holidays) at 8:00 a.m. The Court sometimes rules on the
27
papers, issuing a written order and vacating the hearing. If a written request for oral
28
argument is filed before a ruling, stating that a lawyer of four or fewer years out of law
3
1
school will conduct the oral argument or at least the lion’s share, then the Court will hear
2
oral argument, believing that young lawyers need more opportunities for appearances
3
than they usually receive. Discovery motions should be as per the supplemental order
4
referenced in paragraph 15 and shall be expedited.
5
9.
The last date to file dispositive motions shall be SEPTEMBER 5, 2013. No dispositive
6
motions shall be heard more than 35 days after this deadline, i.e., if any party waits until
7
the last day to file, then the parties must adhere to the 35-day track in order to avoid
8
pressure on the trial date.
9
10.
The FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE shall be at 2:00 P.M. on OCTOBER 28, 2013.
Although the Court encourages argument and participation by younger attorneys, lead
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
trial counsel must attend the final pretrial conference. For the form of submissions for
12
the final pretrial conference and trial, please see paragraph 15 below.
13
11.
A BENCH TRIAL shall begin on NOVEMBER 4, 2013, at 7:30 A.M., in Courtroom 8,
14
19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, 94102. The trial
15
schedule and time limits shall be set at the final pretrial conference. Although almost all
16
trials proceed on the date scheduled, it may be necessary on occasion for a case to trail,
17
meaning the trial may commence a few days or even a few weeks after the date stated
18
above, due to calendar congestion and the need to give priority to criminal trials.
19
Counsel and the parties should plan accordingly, including advising witnesses.
20
12.
Counsel may not stipulate around the foregoing dates without Court approval.
21
13.
While the Court encourages the parties to engage in settlement discussions, please do not
22
ask for any extensions on the ground of settlement discussions or on the ground that the
23
parties experienced delays in scheduling settlement conferences, mediation or ENE.
24
The parties should proceed to prepare their cases for trial. No continuance (even if
25
stipulated) shall be granted on the ground of incomplete preparation without competent
26
and detailed declarations setting forth good cause.
27
28
14.
To avoid any misunderstanding with respect to the final pretrial conference and trial, the
Court wishes to emphasize that all filings and appearances must be made — on pain of
4
1
dismissal, default or other sanction — unless and until a dismissal fully resolving the
2
case is received. It will not be enough to inform the clerk that a settlement in principle
3
has been reached or to lodge a partially executed settlement agreement or to lodge a fully
4
executed agreement (or dismissal) that resolves less than the entire case.
5
Where, however, a fully-executed settlement agreement clearly and fully disposing of the
6
entire case is lodged reasonably in advance of the pretrial conference or trial and only a
7
ministerial act remains, the Court will arrange a telephone conference to work out an
8
alternate procedure pending a formal dismissal.
9
15.
If you have not already done so, please read and follow the “Supplemental Order to
Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference in Civil Cases Before Judge William
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
Alsup” and other orders issued by the Clerk’s office when this action was commenced.
12
Among other things, the supplemental order explains when submissions are to go to the
13
Clerk’s Office (the general rule) versus when submissions may go directly to chambers
14
(rarely). With respect to the final pretrial conference and trial, please read and follow the
15
“Guidelines For Trial and Final Pretrial Conference in Civil Bench Cases Before The
16
Honorable William Alsup.” All orders and guidelines referenced in the paragraph are
17
available on the district court’s website at http://www.cand.uscourts.gov. The website
18
also includes other guidelines for attorney’s fees motions and the necessary form of
19
attorney time records for cases before Judge Alsup. If you do not have access to the
20
Internet, you may contact Deputy Clerk Dawn K. Toland at (415) 522-2020 to learn how
21
to pick up a hard copy.
22
23
16.
All pretrial disclosures under FRCP 26(a)(3) and objections required by FRCP 26(a)(3)
must be made on the schedule established by said rule.
24
25
26
27
28
5
1
2
17.
Again, this case is REFERRED to MAGISTRATE JUDGE JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY for
MEDIATION/SETTLEMENT.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
Dated: December 18, 2012.
DRAFT
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
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?