Montes et al v. Aerorias De Mexico, S.A. DE C.V. et al

Filing 46

CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER. Final Pretrial Conference set for 3/1/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Jury Selection set for 3/12/2012 09:00 AM before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Jury Trial set for 3/12/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/9/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/9/2011)

Download PDF
*E-Filed 9/9/2011* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 8 12 MONTES ET AL, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff, v. No. C 10-05194 RS CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER AERORIAS DE MEXISCO, S.A. DE C.V. ET AL, Defendant. ____________________________________/ Pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties attended a Case 20 Management Conference on September 8, 2011. After considering the Joint Case Management 21 Statement submitted by the parties and consulting with the attorneys of record for the parties and 22 good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 23 1. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION. 24 MEDIATION. The parties have agreed to participate in mediation before the Honorable 25 Ellen James, and a mediation is scheduled for September 26, 2011. The parties shall promptly 26 notify the Court whether the case is resolved at the mediation. 27 28 CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER NO. C 10-05194 RS 1 2. DISCOVERY. 2 On or before September 21, 2011, all non-expert discovery shall be completed by the parties. 3 Discovery shall limited as follows: (a) ten (10) non-expert depositions per party; (b) twenty-five 4 (25) interrogatories per party, including all discrete subparts; (c) a reasonable number of requests 5 for production of documents or for inspection per party; and (d) a reasonable number of requests for 6 admission per party. 7 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 3. EXPERT WITNESSES. The disclosure and discovery of expert witness opinions shall proceed as follows: A. On or before October 21, 2011, plaintiff shall disclose expert testimony and reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). B. On or before November 4, 2011, defendant shall disclose expert testimony and reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). C. On or before November 18, 2011, all discovery of expert witnesses pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4) shall be completed. 4. PRETRIAL MOTIONS. All pretrial motions must be filed and served pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7. All pretrial motions shall be heard no later than January 26, 2012. 5. PRETRIAL STATEMENTS. At a time convenient to both, counsel shall meet and 18 confer to discuss preparation of a joint pretrial statement, and on or before February 16, 2012, 19 counsel shall file a Joint Pretrial Statement. 20 6. PRETRIAL CONFERENCE. The final pretrial conference will be held on March 1, 21 2012, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, United States Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate 22 Avenue, San Francisco, California. Each party or lead counsel who will try the case shall attend 23 personally. 24 7. TRIAL DATE. Jury trial shall commence on March 12, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., in 25 Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, United States Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, 26 California. CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER NO. C 10-05194 RS 27 28 2 1 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 4 DATED: 9/9/11 _______________________________ RICHARD SEEBORG United States District Judge 5 6 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 CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER NO. C 10-05194 RS 27 28 3

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?