Rincon v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

Filing 29

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James granting in part and denying in part 28 Motion to Modify Scheduling Order in Re Discovery and Dispositive Motion Dates. (rmm2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/5/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Richard Johnston - SBN 124524
131-A Stony Circle, Suite 500
Santa Rosa, California 95401
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile [phone]

Attorney for Plaintiff
Melanie Rincon

W. Gary Kohlman
Abigail Carter
Bredhoff & Kaiser, PLLC
805 15th Street, NW, Suite 1000
Washington D.C. 20005
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile [phone]

Attorneys for Defendant
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

MELANIE RINCON,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE,
)
COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, et)
al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________________

Case No. C12-4158 MEJ
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER MODIFYING SCHEDULING
ORDER IN RE DISCOVERY AND
DISPOSITIVE MOTION DATES

20
21
22

The parties hereto, by their undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate

23

and agree as follows, and respectfully request that the court modify its November 26, 2012

24

Case Management Order in the following respects.

25
26
27
28

1. By this stipulation the parties request modest modifications to paragraphs B and
C of the Case Management Order, as described in paragraph 3 below.
____________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
MODIFY CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

1

2. The parties suggest good cause for the requested modification exists in that:
a. The parties have diligently pursued pretrial discovery in the months

2
3

following the Case Management Order’s issuance. Both parties have conducted significant

4

paper discovery, including inspection demands, third-party subpoenas, and

5

interrogatories, and have cooperated in scheduling matters and in resolving discovery

6

disputes without the need for judicial intervention. The depositions of plaintiff and of her

7

treating physician have been completed. Moreover, although they have not made each

8

other aware of the specifics or details of same, each party hereby represents to the court

9

that it has conducted significant informal investigation into the matters alleged in the

10

pleadings as well.

11

b. Experts have been timely disclosed by the parties. After disclosure and

12

production of the written report of Ms. Rincon’s designated expert Mary Ciddio, M.A.,

13

CRC, CDMS, D/ABVE, however, Ms. Ciddio advised of a previously unanticipated conflict

14

in her schedule rendering her unavailable for deposition through the end of June 2013.

15

The parties have met and conferred as to the most efficient manner in which to address

16

this development, and believe the modifications requested by this stipulation would be the

17

most efficacious manner in which to proceed.
c. Defendant AFSCME has associated new counsel into the case as of May 10,

18
19

2013. See Docket No. 26. New counsel is located in Washington D.C., the location of

20

AFSCME’s headquarters, and was associated in part to defend depositions of AFSCME

21

personnel at AFSCME headquarters. The parties have worked diligently together to

22

arrange and schedule the Washington depositions taking into account the calendars of all

23

concerned.

24

d. The requested modifications do not significantly extend the time limits set

25

forth in the Case Management Conference. They do not impact any other aspects of the

26

order, including pre-trial conference or trial dates.

27
28

____________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
MODIFY CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

2

1
2
3
4

e. Neither party would be prejudiced by the court’s approval of the requested
modifications.
f. The parties have requested no previous modifications to the Case
Management Order, nor continuances of any other dates in this matter.

5
6
7

3. The requested modifications are:
a. With respect to paragraph B of the Case Management Order: Modify due

8

date for filing dispositive motions from June 27, 2013, to July 11, 2013; hearing on

9

dispositive motions to be scheduled August 8, 2013, or such subsequent date as the court

10

may determine (if the hearing is scheduled for August 8 the parties have agreed to a

11

modified briefing schedule whereby the reply brief would be filed July 25, 2013, such that

12

the briefing will be completed two weeks prior to the hearing as contemplated by Civil

13

Local Rules 56-1 and 7-3(c));

14

b. With respect to paragraph C of the Case Management Order: Modify

15

discovery cutoff date generally to June 21, 2013, and with respect to expert depositions to

16

July 10, 2013.

17
18
19

Respectfully submitted,

20
21

Dated: May 31, 2013

22

s/ Richard Johnston
Richard Johnston

23

Bredhoff & Kaiser, PLLC
s/Abigail Carter
By: Abigail Carter

Attorney for Plaintiff

Attorneys for Defendant

24
25
26
27
28

____________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
MODIFY CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

3

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2

Upon the parties’ stipulation, and good cause appearing therefor, it is ordered
3
that the Case Management Order entered herein on November 26, 2012, be modified in
4
the following respects:
5
6
7
8
9
10

a. Paragraph B of the Case Management Order is modified such that the last
day to file dispositive motions shall be July 11, 2013; and the hearing date for dispositive
August 15
motions shall be [August 8, 2013] [_____________, 2013.] The parties shall agree to a
briefing schedule so that all briefing is complete and submitted to the court no less than
two weeks prior to the assigned hearing date.

11
12
13
14

b. Paragraph C of the Case Management Order is modified such that the
discovery cutoff date shall be June 21, 2013, and with respect to expert depositions shall
be July 10, 2013.

15
16

June 5, 2013
Dated: ___________________, 2013

17
18

_______________________________
Maria-Elena James
United States Magistrate Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

____________________
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
MODIFY CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

4