Robert L. Steinberg v. Provident Funding Associates, L.P.
Filing
45
SCHEDULING ORDER. Mediation deadline 9/15/2016. Deadline to add parties or amend the pleadings 10/7/2016. Deadline to file class certification motion 4/21/2017. Class certification opposition 5/19/2017. Class certification reply 6/2/2017. He aring on class certification motion 6/22/2017 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Fact discovery cut-off 3/24/2017. Expert disclosures 7/28/2017. Expert rebuttal 8/25/2017. Expert discovery cut-off 9/29/2017. Deadline to file d ispositive motions 9/29/2017. Pretrial conference statement due 12/22/2017. Pretrial Conference set for 1/5/2018 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 4th Floor, Oakland. Jury Trial set for 1/29/2018 - 2/8/2018 at 8:30 AM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Jon S. Tigar. The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for August 10, 2016 is vacated. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on July 28, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/28/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
ROBERT L. STEINBERG, et al.,
Case No. 15-cv-03743-JST
Plaintiffs,
9
v.
SCHEDULING ORDER
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
PROVIDENT FUNDING ASSOCIATES,
L.P.,
Defendant.
13
14
15
The Court hereby sets the following case deadlines pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 16 and Civil Local Rule 16-10:
16
Event
Deadline
17
Mediation deadline (ECF No. 39)
September 15, 2016
Deadline to add parties or amend the pleadings
October 7, 2016
20
Deadline to file class certification motion
April 21, 2017
21
Class certification opposition
May 19, 2017
22
Class certification reply
June 2, 2017
Hearing on class certification motion
June 22, 2017 at 2:00
p.m.
25
Fact discovery cut-off
March 24, 2017
26
Expert disclosures
July 28, 2017
27
Expert rebuttal
August 25, 2017
18
19
23
24
28
Event
1
Deadline
2
Expert discovery cut-off
September 29, 2017
3
Deadline to file dispositive motions
September 29, 2017
Pretrial conference statement due
December 22, 2017
Pretrial conference
January 5, 2018
Trial
January 29, 2018
Estimate of trial length (in days)
Eight
4
5
6
7
8
This case will be tried to a jury.1
9
The Court expresses no view now as to the timing of Provident’s anticipated summary
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
judgment motion. See ECF No. 44 at 4.
Counsel may not modify these dates without leave of court. The parties shall comply with
12
13
the Court’s standing orders, which are available at cand.uscourts.gov/jstorders.
The parties must take all necessary steps to conduct discovery, compel discovery, hire
14
15
counsel, retain experts, and manage their calendars so that they can complete discovery in a timely
16
manner and appear at trial on the noticed and scheduled dates. All counsel must arrange their
17
calendars to accommodate these dates, or arrange to substitute or associate in counsel who can.
Trial dates set by this Court should be regarded as firm. Requests for continuance are
18
19
disfavored. The Court will not consider any event subsequently scheduled by a party, party-
20
controlled witness, expert or attorney that conflicts with the above trial date as good cause to grant
21
a continuance. The Court will not consider the pendency of settlement discussions as good cause
22
to grant a continuance.
23
///
24
///
25
///
26
27
28
1
In the parties’ Joint Case Management Statement, Provident contends that “Plaintiffs are not
entitled to a jury trial under the terms of the governing loan agreements.” ECF No. 44 at 7. The
Court does not determine that issue now.
2
1
The Case Management Conference currently scheduled for August 10, 2016 is vacated.
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
Dated: July 28, 2016
4
5
6
_______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?