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)

Download PDF
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?