Yates v. Jumbo Seafood Restaurant, Inc. et al

Filing 41

SCHEDULING ORDER Preliminary Pretrial Conference Statements due by 3/30/2012. Discovery due by 5/11/2012. Motions due by 7/9/2012. Preliminary Pretrial Conference set for 4/9/2012 11:00 AM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. James Ware. Signed by Judge James Ware on 10/18/11. (sis, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
Craig Yates,

NO. C 10-02652 JW

11
Plaintiff,
12
13

SCHEDULING ORDER

v.
Jumbo Seafood Restaurant, Inc., et al.,
Defendants.

14

/
15
Jumbo Seafood Restaurant, Inc.,
16
Third-Party Plaintiff,
17
18

v.
Amco Insurance Co., Inc.,
Third-Party Defendant.

19

/
20
21

This case is scheduled for a Case Management Conference on October 24, 2011. Pursuant to

22

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules of this Court, the parties submitted a Joint

23

Case Management Statement.1 (See Docket Item No. 40.) Based on the parties’ submission, it

24
25
26
27
28

1

Although it is captioned as a “Joint Case Management Statement,” the Statement is submitted
solely by Third-Party Defendant Amco Insurance Co. (“Amco”), which contends that it “submitted [the
Statement] to counsel for [Third-Party Plaintiff Jumbo Seafood Restaurant, Inc. (“Jumbo”)] by fax, and
then confirmed by telephone that counsel for Jumbo received [the Statement].” (Docket Item No. 40
at 1.) Amco further contends that “Jumbo has not communicated approval or disapproval of [the

1

appears that a schedule for the case can be set without the necessity of an appearance at this time.

2

Accordingly, the Case Management Conference is VACATED and the parties are ordered to comply

3

with the following schedule:

4

CASE SCHEDULE

5

Close of All Discovery (¶ 9)

May 11, 2012

6

Last Date for Hearing Dispositive Motions (¶ 10)
(.60 days after the Close of All Discovery)

July 9, 2012

Preliminary Pretrial Conference at 11 a.m. (¶ 12)
(.30 days before the Close of All Discovery)

April 9, 2012

8
9

Preliminary Pretrial Conference Statements (¶ 11)
(Due 10 days before conference)

March 30, 2012

7

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

None of the dates set in this Order may be changed without an order of the Court made after
a motion is filed pursuant to the Civil Local Rules of Court.

13
14

Standing Order to Lodge Printed Copy of "ECF" Papers
1.

In all cases, including cases covered by the Electronic Case Filing System of

15

the Court "ECF," when filing papers in connection with any motion or any pretrial conference, in

16

addition to filing the paper electronically, the filing parties shall lodge with the Clerk's Office a

17

printed copy of the papers, in an envelop clearly marked "Chamber's Copy – Lodged for the

18

Chambers of Judge James Ware." The "Chamber's Copy" envelop must state the case name and case

19

number and be delivered on or before the close of the next court day following the day the papers

20

are filed electronically. See Standing Order Regarding Case Management in Civil Cases.

21

Compliance with Discovery Plan and Reference to Magistrate Judge

22

2.

23

The parties are ordered to comply with the discovery plan as set forth in the

Case Schedule. Any disputes with respect to the implementation of the discovery plan and all

24
25

27

Statement] and counsel for Amco has been unable to reach counsel for Jumbo to discuss [the
Statement].” (Id.) Although the Court is concerned that Third-Party Plaintiff appears to have ignored
the Court’s order to meet and confer with Third-Party Defendant to advance this case, upon review of
the case the Court finds that it can set a schedule without Third-Party Plaintiff’s input.

28

2

26

1

disclosure or discovery disputes are referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge. In addition, any

2

disputes pertaining to service or joinder of parties or claims are referred to the assigned Magistrate

3

Judge.

4
5

Document Management During Pretrial Discovery and Electronic Evidence Presentation
3.

This Court has available a digital and video electronic evidence presentation

6

system. Before commencement of pretrial discovery, the parties are ordered to familiarize

7

themselves with the system, and to meet and confer about whether the case will involve voluminous

8

documentary. If so, as the parties identify documentary material which is likely to be used as trial

9

exhibits, the parties are ordered to electronically store these materials in a fashion which will

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

facilitate displaying them electronically during the trial. The parties are reminded that Civil L.R. 30-

11

2(b) requires sequential numbering of exhibits during depositions and that numbering must be

12

maintained for those exhibits throughout the litigation. Each proposed exhibit shall be pre-marked

13

for identification. All exhibits shall be marked with numerals. The parties shall meet and confer on

14

a division which will avoid duplication (e.g., Plaintiff: 1-99,000; Defendant #1: 100,000-299,999;

15

Defendant #2: 300,000-500,000).

16
17

Disclosure of Expert Witnesses
4.

Any party wishing to present expert witness testimony with respect to a

18

claim or a defense shall lodge with the Court and serve on all other parties the name, address,

19

qualifications, résumé and a written report which complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) 63 days

20

before close of discovery. Expert witness disclosure must be made with respect to a person who is

21

either (a) specially retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony pursuant to

22

Fed.R.Evid. 702 or (b) a regular employee or agent or treating physician who may be called to

23

provide expert opinion testimony.

24
25
26

5.

The parties are also required to lodge any supplemental reports to which any

expert will testify at trial in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B).
6.

Any party objecting to the qualifications or proposed testimony of an expert

27

must file, serve and notice a motion to exclude the expert or any portion of the expert’s testimony in

28

3

1

writing in accordance with Civil Local Rule 7-2, for hearing no later than 42 DAYS AFTER BOTH

2

EXPERT AND REBUTTAL EXPERT DISCLOSURES ON A MONDAY (LAW AND

3

MOTION DAY) at 9:00 a.m. and preferably before or on the same day as the discovery cutoff

4

date at 9:00 a.m.

5
6

Rebuttal Expert Witnesses
7.

If the testimony of the expert is intended solely to contradict or rebut opinion

7

testimony on the same subject matter identified by another party, the party proffering a rebuttal

8

expert shall make the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B), no later than 49 days

9

prior to discovery cutoff.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

Limitation on Testimony by Expert Witnesses
8.

Unless the parties enter into a written stipulation otherwise, upon timely

12

objection, an expert witness shall be precluded from testifying about any actions or opinions not

13

disclosed prior to the expert’s deposition. This is to ensure that all factual material upon which

14

expert opinion may be based and all tests and reports are completed prior to the expert deposition.

15

Unless application is made prior to the close of expert discovery, each party will be limited to

16

calling only one expert witness in each discipline involved in the case.
Close of Discovery

17
18

9.

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 26-2, all discovery, including supplemental

19

disclosure, depositions of fact witness and expert witnesses, must be completed on or before the

20

deadline set forth in the Case Schedule above.
Last date for Hearing Dispositive Motions

21
22
23
24
25

10.

The last day for hearing dispositive motions is set forth in the Case Schedule

above. Any motions must be noticed in accordance with the Civil Local Rules of this Court.
Preliminary Pretrial and Trial Setting Conference Statement and Proposed Order
11.

The attorneys who will try the case are ordered to confer with one another

26

and to file and lodge with Chambers on or before the deadline set forth in the Case Schedule above a

27

Preliminary Pretrial and Trial Setting Conference Statement and Proposed Order, stating their

28

4

1

readiness for trial, the amount of time which the Court should allocate for trial and the calendar

2

period for the trial.

3

12.

4
5

The attorneys who will try the case are ordered to appear on the date set in

the Case Schedule at 11:00 a.m. for a Preliminary Pretrial and Trial Setting Conference.
13.

With respect to the time allocation for trial, at the Preliminary Pretrial and

6

Trial Setting Conference trial counsel will be asked to stipulate to a time allocation to each side for

7

the trial of the case. Once a stipulated allocation has been entered, the parties must plan their

8

presentations to conform to the stipulated time allocation.

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

Dated: October 18, 2011
JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5

1

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

2

Bradley Jay Jameson [e-mail]
Brian Y.K. Ching [e-mail]
Gary T. Lafayette [e-mail]
Glen Elliot Turner [e-mail]
Thomas E. Frankovich [e-mail]

3
4
5

Dated: October 18, 2011

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

6
7

By: /s/ JW Chambers
Susan Imbriani
Courtroom Deputy

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

6