Xiong v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Filing
32
SECOND AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER- The parties' Unopposed Motion to extend Deadlines 31 is granted. Deposition deadline is July 6, 2021 Status Conference set for 6/29/2021 at 01:00 PM by Telephone before Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (MKR)
4:19-cv-03109-SMB Doc # 32 Filed: 11/17/20 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID # 49
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
JING XIONG,
Plaintiff,
4:19CV3109
vs.
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY,
SECOND AMENDED FINAL
PROGRESSION ORDER
Defendant.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the parties’ Unopposed Motion to Extend
Deadlines. (Filing No. 31.) The motion is granted. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the provisions of the Courts’ previous final progression order
remain in effect, and in addition to those provisions, progression shall be amended as follows:
1)
The trial and pretrial conference will not be set at this time. The telephone
conference presently scheduled for April 6, 2021 is canceled. A telephonic status
conference to discuss case progression, the parties’ interest in settlement, and
the trial and pretrial conference settings will be held with the undersigned
magistrate judge on June 29, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. Counsel shall use the conferencing
instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. (Filing No. 27.)
2)
The deadline for completing written discovery under Rules 33, 34, and 36 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is July 6, 2021. Motions to compel discovery
under Rules 33, 34, and 36 must be filed by July 19, 2021.
Note: A motion to compel, to quash, or for a disputed protective order shall not be
filed without first contacting the chambers of the undersigned magistrate judge to
set a conference for discussing the parties’ dispute.
3)
The deadlines for identifying expert witnesses expected to testify at the trial, (both
retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non-retained experts, (Fed. R.
Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are:
For the plaintiff(s): March 7, 2021
For the defendant(s): June 2, 2021
4:19-cv-03109-SMB Doc # 32 Filed: 11/17/20 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID # 50
4)
The deadlines for complete expert disclosures1 for all experts expected to testify at
trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non-retained
experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are:
For the plaintiff(s): March 7, 2021
For the defendant(s): June 2, 2021
5)
The deposition deadline is July 6, 2021.
a. The maximum number of depositions that may be taken by the plaintiffs as
a group and the defendants as a group is 10.
b. Depositions will be limited by Rule 30(d)(1).
6)
The deadline for filing motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment is
July 28, 2021.
7)
The deadline for filing motions to exclude testimony on Daubert and related
grounds is July 28, 2021.
8)
The parties shall comply with all other stipulations and agreements recited in their
Rule 26(f) planning report that are not inconsistent with this order.
9)
All requests for changes of deadlines or settings established herein shall be
directed to the undersigned magistrate judge. Such requests will not be considered
absent a showing of due diligence in the timely progression of this case and the
recent development of circumstances, unanticipated prior to the filing of the
motion, which require that additional time be allowed.
Dated this 17th day of November, 2020.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Susan M. Bazis
United States Magistrate Judge
While treating medical and mental health care providers are generally not considered “specially retained
experts,” not all their opinions relate to the care and treatment of a patient. Their opinion testimony is limited to what
is stated within their treatment documentation. As to each such expert, any opinions which are not stated within that
expert’s treatment records and reports must be separately and timely disclosed.
1
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?