Jackson et al v. Oak Grove School District et al

Filing 200

ORDER vacating hearing on 189 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint filed by Atkinson Andelson Loya Ruud & Romo, Deanna Jean Mouser, 190 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint filed by Oak Grove School Dist rict, Jacqueline Adams, Richard Holtermann, Katherine Baker, Nancy Lettenberger, Dianne Lemke, Risa Quon, Dennis Hawkins, Jeremy Nishihara, Tamara Unck, Emanuel Barbara; vacating case management conference; scheduling order. Signed by Judge James Ware on November 3, 2011. (jwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/3/2011)

Download PDF
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 NO. C 08-05376 JW J.J., 11 ORDER VACATING HEARING ON MOTIONS AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; SCHEDULING ORDER Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 Oak Grove Sch. Dist., et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 This case is scheduled for a hearing on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss1 and a Case Management Conference for November 7, 2011. Upon review, the Court finds it appropriate to take the Motions under submission without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). On October 31, 2011, Defendants submitted a Case Management Statement. (See Docket Item No. 199.) Plaintiff failed to join in the Statement. Based on the Defendants’ submission and the Court’s evaluation of the case, the Court finds that a schedule for the case can be set without the necessity of an appearance at this time. Accordingly, the Case Management Conference is VACATED and the parties are ordered to comply with the following schedule: 24 25 26 27 28 / 1 (See Docket Item Nos. 189, 190.) 1 CASE SCHEDULE 2 Close of All Discovery (¶ 9) July 23, 2012 3 Last Date for Hearing Dispositive Motions (¶ 10) (.60 days after the Close of All Discovery) September 24, 2012 Preliminary Pretrial Conference at 11 a.m. (¶ 12) (.30 days before the Close of All Discovery) June 25, 2012 5 6 Preliminary Pretrial Conference Statements (¶ 11) (Due 10 days before conference) June 15, 2012 4 7 None of the dates set in this Order may be changed without an order of the Court made after 8 a motion is filed pursuant to the Civil Local Rules of Court. 9 Standing Order to Lodge Printed Copy of "ECF" Papers United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 1. In all cases, including cases covered by the Electronic Case Filing System of 11 the Court "ECF," when filing papers in connection with any motion or any pretrial conference, in 12 addition to filing the paper electronically, the filing parties shall lodge with the Clerk's Office a 13 printed copy of the papers, in an envelop clearly marked "Chamber's Copy – Lodged for the 14 Chambers of Judge James Ware." The "Chamber's Copy" envelop must state the case name and case 15 number and be delivered on or before the close of the next court day following the day the papers 16 are filed electronically. See Standing Order Regarding Case Management in Civil Cases. 17 Compliance with Discovery Plan and Reference to Magistrate Judge 18 2. The parties are ordered to comply with the discovery plan as set forth in the 19 Case Schedule. Any disputes with respect to the implementation of the discovery plan and all 20 disclosure or discovery disputes are referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge. In addition, any 21 disputes pertaining to service or joinder of parties or claims are referred to the assigned Magistrate 22 Judge. 23 Document Management During Pretrial Discovery and Electronic Evidence Presentation 24 3. This Court has available a digital and video electronic evidence presentation 25 system. Before commencement of pretrial discovery, the parties are ordered to familiarize 26 themselves with the system, and to meet and confer about whether the case will involve voluminous 27 28 2 1 documentary. If so, as the parties identify documentary material which is likely to be used as trial 2 exhibits, the parties are ordered to electronically store these materials in a fashion which will 3 facilitate displaying them electronically during the trial. The parties are reminded that Civil L.R. 30- 4 2(b) requires sequential numbering of exhibits during depositions and that numbering must be 5 maintained for those exhibits throughout the litigation. Each proposed exhibit shall be pre-marked 6 for identification. All exhibits shall be marked with numerals. The parties shall meet and confer on 7 a division which will avoid duplication (e.g., Plaintiff: 1-99,000; Defendant #1: 100,000-299,999; 8 Defendant #2: 300,000-500,000). 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 Disclosure of Expert Witnesses 4. Any party wishing to present expert witness testimony with respect to a 11 claim or a defense shall lodge with the Court and serve on all other parties the name, address, 12 qualifications, résumé and a written report which complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) 63 days 13 before close of discovery. Expert witness disclosure must be made with respect to a person who is 14 either (a) specially retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony pursuant to 15 Fed.R.Evid. 702 or (b) a regular employee or agent or treating physician who may be called to 16 provide expert opinion testimony. 17 18 19 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 20 must file, serve and notice a motion to exclude the expert or any portion of the expert's testimony in 21 writing in accordance with Civil Local Rule 7-2, for hearing no later than 42 DAYS AFTER BOTH 22 EXPERT AND REBUTTAL EXPERT DISCLOSURES ON A MONDAY (LAW AND 23 MOTION DAY) at 9:00 a.m. and preferably before or on the same day as the discovery cutoff 24 date at 9:00 a.m. Rebuttal Expert Witnesses 25 26 27 28 7. If the testimony of the expert is intended solely to contradict or rebut opinion testimony on the same subject matter identified by another party, the party proffering a rebuttal 3 1 expert shall make the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B), no later than 49 days 2 prior to discovery cutoff. 3 4 Limitation on Testimony by Expert Witnesses 8. Unless the parties enter into a written stipulation otherwise, upon timely 5 objection, an expert witness shall be precluded from testifying about any actions or opinions not 6 disclosed prior to the expert’s deposition. This is to ensure that all factual material upon which 7 expert opinion may be based and all tests and reports are completed prior to the expert deposition. 8 Unless application is made prior to the close of expert discovery, each party will be limited to 9 calling only one expert witness in each discipline involved in the case. United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 Close of Discovery 9. Pursuant to Civil L.R. 26-2, all discovery, including supplemental 12 disclosure, depositions of fact witness and expert witnesses, must be completed on or before the 13 deadline set forth in the Case Schedule above. 14 15 16 17 18 Last date for Hearing Dispositive Motions 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 19 and to file and lodge with Chambers on or before the deadline set forth in the Case Schedule above a 20 Preliminary Pretrial and Trial Setting Conference Statement and Proposed Order, stating their 21 readiness for trial, the amount of time which the Court should allocate for trial and the calendar 22 period for the trial. 23 12. 24 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. 25 26 27 28 4 1 13. With respect to the time allocation for trial, at the Preliminary Pretrial and 2 Trial Setting Conference trial counsel will be asked to stipulate to a time allocation to each side for 3 the trial of the case. Once a stipulated allocation has been entered, the parties must plan their 4 presentations to conform to the stipulated time allocation. 5 6 7 Dated: November 3, 2011 JAMES WARE United States District Chief Judge 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 5 1 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO: 2 Deanna Jean Mouser dmouser@aalrr.com Eric C Bellafronto ebellafronto@littler.com John Stanley Adler Jadler@littler.com Mark E. Davis mdavis@davisyounglaw.com Maureen A. Folan mfolan@davisyounglaw.com Robert M. Vantress rvantress@vantresslaw.com Yona Conzevoy yconzevoy@aalrr.com 3 4 5 6 Dated: November 3, 2011 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk 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

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?