La Roca Christian Communities International, Inc. v. Church Mutual Insurance Co.

Filing 28

ORDER on 25 , 27 Joint Motions to Extend Deadlines. Mandatory Settlement Conference reset for 4/27/2022 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Bernard G. Skomal. Memorandum of Contentions of Fact and Law now due by 5/13/2022. Proposed Pretrial Order du e by 6/3/2022. Final Pretrial Conference reset for 6/10/2022 10:30 AM before Chief District Judge Dana M. Sabraw. Jury Trial reset for 7/11/2022 09:00 AM before Chief District Judge Dana M. Sabraw. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernard G. Skomal on 6/2/2021. (mme)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

LA ROCA CHRISTIAN
COMMUNITIES INTERNATIONAL,
INC.,

Case No.: 20-cv-1324-DMS-BGS
ORDER ON JOINT MOTIONS TO
EXTEND DEADLINES

Plaintiff,
v.

[ECF 25, 27]

CHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.,
Defendant.

15
16
17

On May 10, 2021, the parties filed a Stipulation to Extend Deadlines in the

18

Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (“Joint Motion”) seeking to extend the fact

19

discovery deadline by approximately eight weeks and the remaining deadlines by 90

20

days. (ECF 25 at 2-3. 1) In support of the extensions, the parties indicated that they

21

believe their respective dispositive motions addressing the threshold issue of the duty to

22

defend should precede depositions and expert discovery. (Id. at 3.) However, the Joint

23

Motion indicated that the parties did not serve written discovery requests and third-party

24

subpoenas until late April (Defendant) and early May (Plaintiff), did not explain why the

25

parties waited two months to pursue discovery, or identify when responses to that

26
27
28

1

Citations are to the CM/ECF electronic pagination unless otherwise indicated.
1
20-cv-1324-DMS-BGS

1

discovery were due. (Id. at 3.) It also did not indicate what specific discovery remained

2

to be conducted, what additional discovery was needed to accommodate dispositive

3

motions regarding the duty to defend, how soon those motions could be filed, or what

4

discovery was needed after those motions are decided.

5

Given this missing information, (see Chambers Rules III.C.1), the Court ordered

6

the parties to file a supplemental brief with supporting declaration(s) that complied with

7

the Chambers Rules and addressed these deficiencies. (ECF 26.) The Court required the

8

parties to identify the specific discovery needed both before and after the dispositive

9

motions, how much time was needed to file dispositive motions, and why the time

10

requested was needed. (Id.)

11

On May 17, 2021, the parties’ filed a Further Joint Motion that responds to the

12

Courts Order. (ECF 27.) The parties explain their efforts regarding initial disclosures

13

and identify the deadlines for responses to their respective written discovery requests –

14

May 26, 2021 (Defendant’s) and June 7, 2021 (Plaintiff’s). The parties also indicate that

15

each has issued a third-party subpoena with responses due May 18, 2021 (Defendant’s)

16

and June 7, 2021 (Plaintiff’s).

17

As to remaining fact discovery, the parties identify four depositions and two

18

potential depositions. (Id. at 4.) As to expert discovery, should it be necessary,2 the

19

parties identify expert reports and expert depositions for the parties’ respective claims-

20

handling experts and possible fee experts. (Id.)

21

Plaintiff indicates that all discovery needed to bring its dispositive motion

22

regarding the duty to defend issue is complete. (Id.) However, before Defendant could

23

file its dispositive motion on the duty to defend, Defendant requires the responses to both

24

Defendant’s April 26, 2021 requests for production of documents (due May 26, 2021)

25

and its third-party subpoena (due May 18, 2021). Defendant also indicates that

26
27
28

The parties indicate that “[d]epending on the outcome of the motions, expert discovery
may no longer be necessary or appropriate.” (ECF 27 at 5.)
2

2
20-cv-1324-DMS-BGS

1

depending on the documents received, it may need a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition and/or to

2

depose non-party Pacific Coast Prep. (Id.)

3

Because the parties’ motions will both address the duty to defendant and the duty

4

to indemnify, the parties prefer the motions be heard at the same time. (Id. at 5.) The

5

parties indicate they intend to file those motions on or before August 20, 2021. (Id.)

6

As to all other deadlines in the Scheduling Order, the parties propose the

7

following:

8

Current Deadline

Proposed Extension

Fact Discovery Cut-Off

June 10, 2021

August 5, 2021

10

Parties’ Initial Expert Designations

July 12, 2021

October 11, 2021

11

Parties’ Supplemental Expert

July 26, 2021

October 25, 2021

12

Designations

13

Parties Serve Initial Expert Reports

August 26, 2021

November 24, 2021

14

Parties Serve Rebuttal Expert Reports

September 9, 2021

December 8, 2021

15

Expert Discovery Cut-Off

October 11, 2021

January 10, 2022

16

Last Day to File Dispositive Motions

November 12, 2021 February 10, 2021

17

Mandatory Settlement Conference

January 28, 2022

April 28, 2022

18

Pretrial Conference

March 11, 2022

June 9, 2022

19

Trial

April 11, 2022

July 11, 2022

9

20
21

While the parties explain that reviewing initial disclosures and engaging in

22

informal discussions regarding anticipated discovery was time consuming, the Court

23

notes that both parties waited more than two months to pursue any discovery at all. The

24

Scheduling Order in this case was issued on February 19, 2021 and the parties’ respective

25

discovery requests to each other were not issued until April 26, 2021 and May 7, 2021.

26

This resulted in responses being due very shortly before the fact discovery deadline of

27

June 10, 2021, May 26, 2021 (Defendant’s) and June 7, 2021 (Plaintiff’s). As to these

28

specific requests, this is technically in compliance with the Court’s Order that discovery
3
20-cv-1324-DMS-BGS

1

must be “completed”3 by the June 10, 2021 fact discovery deadline. However, it is

2

concerning because there was obviously discovery that still had to be completed

3

following these responses and no time to conduct it. For example, it appears Defendant

4

knew it needed the responses before conducting a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition. (Id. at 4

5

(“Depending on the discovery responses received, [Defendant] may also require

6

additional discovery in the form of a [Rule] 30(b)(6) deposition and/or deposition of non-

7

party Pacific Coast Christian Prep prior to filing its motion.”) In this respect, the parties

8

knew even before those discovery requests were issued that they would not be able to

9

meet the fact discovery deadline.

10

Despite this delay in pursuing fact discovery, the Court finds the parties have

11

shown good cause to modify the Scheduling Order to allow them to file early dispositive

12

motions on the issue of the duty to defend and extend the deadlines in the Scheduling

13

Order as follows:

14

Current Deadline

New Deadline

15

Discovery as to Duty to Defend 4

NA

July 9, 2021

16

Dispositive Motions on Duty to Defend

NA

July 30, 2021

17

Filed

18

Any Other Fact Discovery Not Already

June 10, 2021

August 5, 2021

19

Completed

20

Parties’ Initial Expert Designations

July 12, 2021

October 11, 2021

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

“‘Completed’ means that all discovery under Rules 30-36 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be initiated a sufficient period
of time in advance of the cut-off date, so that it may be completed by the cut-off date,
taking into account the times for service, notice and response as set forth in the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.” (ECF 21 at 1-2.)
4
Parties must complete all discovery needed for filing their respective dispositive
motions on the duty to defend by this date.
3

4
20-cv-1324-DMS-BGS

1

Parties’ Supplemental Expert

2

Designations

3

July 26, 2021

October 25, 2021

Parties Serve Initial Expert Reports

August 26, 2021

November 24, 2021

4

Parties Serve Rebuttal Expert Reports

September 9, 2021

December 8, 2021

5

Expert Discovery Cut-Off

October 11, 2021

January 10, 2022

6

Last Day to File Dispositive Motions

November 12, 2021 February 10, 2022

7

Mandatory Settlement Conference

January 28, 2022

8
9

2:00 PM
Pretrial Conference 6

March 11, 2022

10
11

June 10, 2022
10:30 AM

Trial

April 11, 2022

12

July 11, 2022
9:00 AM

13
14

April 27, 20225

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 2, 2021

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

MSC briefs must be submitted as indicated in the Scheduling Order (ECF 21) two
weeks prior to the MSC.
6
The parties’ joint motions did not address the deadlines between the MSC and the
Pretrial Conference. They are continued as follows:
•
Memoranda of Contentions of Fact and Law and take any other action required by
Local Rule 16.1(f)(2) by May 13, 2022.
•
Pre-trial disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) by May 13, 2022.
•
Counsel shall meet and take the action required by Local Rule 16.1(f)(4) by May
20, 2022.
•
By May 27, 2022, plaintiff’s counsel must provide opposing counsel with the
proposed pretrial order for review and approval.
•
The Proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order, including objections to any other
parties’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures shall be prepared, served and
lodged with the assigned district judge by June 3, 2022, and shall be in the form
prescribed in and comply with Local Rule 16.1(f)(6).
5

5
20-cv-1324-DMS-BGS