Areas USA SJC, LLC v. Mission San Jose Airport, LLC et al
Filing
112
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd Denying 92 Plaintiff's Motion to Exclude Defendants' Expert Witnesses (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/1/2012)
*E-filed: November 1, 2012*
1
2
3
4
5
NOT FOR CITATION
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
SAN JOSE DIVISION
9
AREAS USA SJC, LLC,
Plaintiff,
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
v.
11
12
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO EXCLUDE
DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT WITNESSES
MISSION SAN JOSE AIRPORT, LLC; ET
AL.,
13
No. C11-04487 HRL
Defendants.
____________________________________/
[Dkt. 92]
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Areas USA SJC, LLC (“Areas”) moves the Court for an order barring defendants Mission
San Jose Airport, LLC and Mission Yogurt, Inc. (collectively “Mission”) from presenting any
expert witness testimony from Stanley Jackson, Dan Ludwig, Rod Tafoya, or Mark Schafer.
Mission opposes the motion. The matter is deemed submitted without oral argument. See Civ. L.
R. 7-1(b). Upon consideration of the moving and responding papers, Areas’ motion is denied.
As a basis for its motion, Areas claims that Mission failed to provide expert reports for these
witnesses, as required by Rule 26(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Mission
counters that Rule 26(a)(2)(C), not Rule 26(a)(2)(B), governs these witnesses and that Rule
26(a)(2)(C) does not require the submission of expert reports. Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a witness
to provide a written report “if the witness is one retained or specially employed to provide expert
testimony in the case or one whose duties as the party’s employee regularly involve giving expert
testimony.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B). The parties do not dispute that Jackson and Ludwig work
for Legends Group and that Mission hired Legends Group as a project manager before this litigation
began. These individuals were therefore not retained to provide expert testimony and their duties do
not regularly involve giving expert testimony. The same goes for Tafoya and Schafer, who work for
1
Mission itself. Accordingly, the expert testimony of these individuals is governed by Rule
2
26(a)(2)(C), which requires a disclosure, but no written reports. Areas does not dispute the
3
sufficiency of Mission’s disclosures under Rule 26(a)(2)(C). As Mission’s expert disclosures did
4
not run afoul of any duty to provide written reports, Areas’ motion to exclude witnesses on that
5
basis is DENIED.
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 1, 2012
HOWARD R. LLOYD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
C11-04487 HRL Notice will be electronically mailed to:
2
Karin Bohmholdt
Scott Bertzyk
Denise Mayo
Daniel Rockey
Meryl Macklin
3
4
5
bohmholdtk@gtlaw.com
bertzyks@gtlaw.com
mayod@gtlaw.com
daniel.rockey@hro.com
meryl.macklin@bryancave.com
Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not
registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.
6
7
8
9
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
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?