Macy's Inc. et al v. Strategic Marks, LLC
Filing
87
Order by Hon. Samuel Conti denying 82 Motion to Clarify Order re: Expert Report Deadline. The Expert Report Deadline remains set per Rule 26 at April 24, 2013, given the trial date of July 23, 2013.(sclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/17/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
9
10
MACY'S, INC. and MACYS.COM,
INC.,
11
12
Plaintiffs,
v.
13
STRATEGIC MARKS, LLC,
14
Defendant.
15
) Case No. 11-6198 SC
)
) ORDER RE: DEFENDANT'S MOTION
) FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
16
17
Now before the Court is Defendant Strategic Marks, LLC's
18
("Defendant") motion for administrative relief, asking that the
19
Court "quickly clarify its February 25, 2013 Order [ECF No. 73
20
("February 25 Order")] continuing the trial date," in order to
21
answer "whether the Court also extended the deadline for the
22
parties to exchange expert reports (the "Expert Report Deadline")
23
by virtue of the February 25 Order."
24
ECF No. 82 ("Mot.").
Plaintiffs Macy's, Inc. and Macys.com, Inc. ("Plaintiffs")
25
oppose this motion.
26
while the Court has, on several occasions, altered the trial
27
schedule per the parties' wishes, the Court has never modified the
28
original May 4, 2012 Order's statement (ECF No. 41 ("May 4 Order")
ECF No. 84 ("Opp'n").
Plaintiffs argue that
1
at 2) that the Expert Report Deadline is governed by Federal Rule
2
of Civil Procedure 26, which sets that deadline at ninety days
3
before the date set for trial.
4
Proc. 26(a)(2)(D)(ii).
5
February 25 Order set the trial date for July 23, 2013, Rule 26
6
sets the Expert Report Deadline at April 24, 2013.
Thus, according to Plaintiffs, since the
Plaintiffs are correct.
7
See Opp'n at 2-5; Fed. R. Civ.
Opp'n at 1.
While none of the parties'
a date for the Expert Report Deadline, the May 4 Order states both
10
United States District Court
stipulations or the Court's scheduling orders has specifically set
9
For the Northern District of California
8
that Rule 26 governs expert witnesses and that the May 4 Order will
11
continue to apply regardless of future continuances, absent some
12
stipulation or intervening order.
13
Defendant appears to have understood on an earlier occasion that
14
after the Court granted a continuance on August 24, 2012 to set the
15
trial date for April 22, 2013 (ECF No. 47), the Expert Report
16
Deadline was set for January 22, 2013 per Rule 26.
17
(citing the parties' correspondence on this topic).
May 4 Order at 1, 2.
Indeed,
See Mot. at 2
Rule 26 sets the Expert Report Deadline at ninety days before
18
19
the trial date.
The trial date has moved several times since this
20
action's inception, but it is now July 23, 2013, and by the terms
21
of Rule 26, the Expert Report Deadline remains set for April 24,
22
2013.
23
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
26
Dated: April 17, 2013
27
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
28
2
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?