Natural Shrimp, Inc. v. Vista Capital Investments, LLC et al

Filing 15

Notice and Order: (1) Granting Joint Motion to Continue Early Neutral Evaluation (ECF No. 12 ) and (2) Re-Setting Early Neutral Evaluation Conference and Setting Rule 26 Compliance and Case Management Conference. The Joint Discovery Plan is due 11/13/2019. The Early Neutral Evaluation and Case Management Conference are reset for 12/2/2019 at 1:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Bernard G. Skomal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernard G. Skomal on 10/8/2019. (tcf)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

Natural Shrimp, Inc.,

Case No.: 19-cv-01239-WQH-BGS
Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

NOTICE AND ORDER:

Vista Capital Investments, LLC; David
Clark,

13

(1) GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO
CONTINUE EARLY NEUTRAL
EVALUATION CONFERENCE

Defendants.

14

[ECF No. 12]

15
AND

16
17

(2) RE-SETTING EARLY NEUTRAL
EVALUATION CONFERENCE AND
SETTING RULE 26 COMPLIANCE
AND CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE.

18
19
20
21
22

Presently before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Continue Early Neutral

23

Evaluation Conference (ECF No 12) based on the unavailability of counsel for Plaintiff.

24

Good cause appearing, the Joint Motion is GRANTED.

25

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that an Early Neutral Evaluation of your

26

case will be held on December 2, 2019, at 1:30 PM before United States Magistrate

27

Judge Bernard G. Skomal, United States District Court, 333 W. Broadway, Suite 1280,

28

San Diego, California.
1
19-cv-01239-WQH-BGS

1
2

The following are mandatory guidelines for the parties preparing for the
Early Neutral Evaluation Conference.

3

1.

Purpose of Conference: The purpose of the Early Neutral Evaluation

4

Conference (“ENE”) is to hold a serious discussion of every aspect of the lawsuit in an

5

effort to achieve an early resolution of the case. All conference discussions will be off

6

the record, privileged and confidential. Counsel for any non-English speaking parties is

7

responsible for arranging for the appearance of an interpreter at the conference.

8

2.

Personal Appearance of Parties Is Required: All parties, adjusters for

9

insured defendants, and client representatives must be present and have full and complete

10

authority to enter into a binding settlement at the ENE.1 The purpose of this requirement

11

is to have representatives present who can settle the case during the course of the

12

conference without consulting a superior. Counsel for a government entity may be

13

excused from this requirement so long as the government attorney who attends the ENE

14

conference (1) has primary responsibility for handling the case; and (2) may negotiate

15

settlement offers which the attorney is willing to recommend to the government official

16

having ultimate settlement authority. Other parties seeking permission to be excused

17

from attending the ENE in person must follow the procedures outlined in Judge Skomal’s

18

Chambers’ Rules. (See Judge Skomal’s Chambers’ Rules II.C.) Failure of any of the

19

above parties to appear at the ENE conference without the Court’s permission will be

20

grounds for sanctions. The principal attorneys responsible for the litigation must also be

21

present in person and prepared to discuss all of the legal and factual issues in the case.

22
23
“Full authority to settle” means that the individuals at the settlement conference must be authorized to
fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the
parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648 (7th Cir. 1989). The person
needs to have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman
v. Brinker Intl., Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-486 (D. Ariz. 2003). The person must be able to bind the
party without the need to call others not present at the conference for authority or approval. The purpose
of requiring a person with unlimited settlement authority to attend the conference includes that the
person’s view of the case may be altered during the face to face conference. Id. at 486. A limited or a
sum certain of authority is not adequate. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590 (8th Cir. 2001).
1

24
25
26
27
28

2
19-cv-01239-WQH-BGS

1

3.

Confidential ENE Statements Required: No later than November 13,

2

2019, the parties must submit confidential statements of seven pages or less directly to

3

Judge Skomal. Please also attach relevant exhibits. The statement must address the legal

4

and factual issues in the case and should focus on issues most pertinent to settling the

5

matter. Statements do not need to be filed or served on opposing counsel. The statement

6

must also include any prior settlement offer or demand, as well as the offer or demand the

7

party will make at the ENE. The Court will keep this information confidential unless the

8

party authorizes the Court to share the information with opposing counsel. ENE

9

statements must be emailed to [e-mail].

10

4.

New Parties Must Be Notified by Plaintiff’s Counsel: Plaintiff’s counsel

11

shall give notice of the ENE to parties responding to the complaint after the date of this

12

notice.

13

5.

Case Management Conference: Any objections made to initial disclosure

14

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule 26(a)(1)(A)-(D) are overruled, and the

15

parties are ordered to proceed with the initial disclosure process. Any further objections

16

to initial disclosure will be resolved as required by Rule 26 and Judge Skomal's

17

Chambers' Rules regarding discovery disputes. Accordingly:

18
19
20
21
22

a.

The Rule 26(f) conference shall be completed on or before October

b.

The date of initial disclosure pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1)(A-D) shall

30, 2019;

occur before November 6, 2019;
c.

A Joint Discovery Plan shall be filed on the CM/ECF system as well

23

as lodged with Magistrate Judge Skomal by delivering the plan directly to chambers or by

24

emailing it to [e-mail], on or before November 13, 2019. The

25

plan must be one document and must explicitly cover the parties' views and proposals for

26

each item identified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(3). Agreements made in the Discovery Plan

27

will be treated as binding stipulations that are effectively incorporated into the Court's

28

Case Management Order.
3
19-cv-01239-WQH-BGS

1

In cases involving significant document production or any electronic discovery, the

2

parties must also include the process and procedure for "claw back" or "quick peek"

3

agreements as contemplated by Fed. R. Evid. 502(d). The parties should also address

4

whether an order providing for protection under Rule 502(e) is needed.

5
6

Finally, the parties must thoughtfully meet and confer about electronic discovery
and include answers to the following questions in the Discovery Plan:

7

i.

8

Are there any preservation issues? If so, what are they and how are
the parties addressing the issues;

9

ii.

What form of production have the parties agreed to? Are there any

10

disputes with respect to the parties’ preferred form of production?

11

What is the parties’ positions respecting Metadata;

12

iii.

Are there any proportionality issues? Specifically address Rule

13

26(b)(2)(B) relating to inaccessible electronically stored information

14

(“ESI”);

15

iv.

What have the parties decided regarding the methodologies for

16

identifying ESI for production? For instance, will the parties conduct

17

key word searching, use predictive coding, or other advanced culling

18

techniques.

19

In the event the case does not settle at the ENE, a Case Management Conference,

20

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) will be held at the conclusion of the

21

settlement conference.

22

6.

Requests to Continue an ENE Conference: Requests to continue ENEs

23

are rarely granted. The Court will, however, consider formal motions to continue an

24

ENE when extraordinary circumstances exist and the other party has no objection. If

25

another party objects to the continuance, counsel for both parties must call chambers and

26

discuss the matter with the research attorney/law clerk assigned to the case before any

27

motion may be filed. Any request for a continuance must be made as soon as counsel

28

is aware of the circumstances that warrant rescheduling the conference. Requests
4
19-cv-01239-WQH-BGS

1

to continue the ENE based on preexisting scheduling conflicts must be raised within

2

10 days of the Court’s issuance of this Order.

3

7.

Settlement Prior to ENE Conference: The Court encourages the parties

4

to work on settling the matter in advance of the ENE Conference. In the event that the

5

parties resolve the matter prior to the day of the conference, the following procedures

6

must be followed before the Court will vacate the ENE and excuse the parties from

7

appearing:

8
9

A.

The parties may file a Joint Motion to Dismiss and submit a proposed

order to the assigned district judge. If a Joint Motion to Dismiss is filed, the Court will

10

immediately vacate the ENE;

11

B.

If the parties settle more than 24 hours before the conference but are

12

not able to file a Joint Motion to Dismiss, they must file a Joint Notice of Settlement

13

containing the electronic signatures of counsel for all settling parties and must also

14

identify a date by which the Joint Motion to Dismiss will be filed;

15

C.

If the parties settle less than 24 hours before the conference, counsel

16

for the settling parties must JOINTLY call chambers and inform the Court of the

17

settlement and receive Court permission to not appear at the ENE.

18

Questions regarding this case or the mandatory guidelines set forth herein may be

19

directed to Judge Skomal’s research attorney at [phone]. Please consult Judge

20

Skomal’s rules, available on the Court’s website, before contacting chambers with your

21

questions.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 8, 2019

24
25
26
27
28
5
19-cv-01239-WQH-BGS