Crabar/GBF, Inc. v. Wright et al

Filing 287

CASE PROGRESSION ORDER (AMENDED) - The pretrial conference is cancelled and will be rescheduled at a later date. A status conference to discuss case progression and the parties' interest in settlement remains scheduled with the undersigned magis trate judge on September 18, 2020, at 10:00 a.m. by telephone. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. A status conference to discuss dispositive motions, the pretrial conference and trial dates, and settlement status will be held with the undersigned magistrate judge on January 4, 2021, at 11:00 a.m. by telephone. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Michael D. Nelson. (LKO)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
CRABAR/GBF, INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.

8:16CV537
CASE PROGRESSION ORDER
(AMENDED)

MARK WRIGHT, WRIGHT PRINTING
CO., MARDRA SIKORA, JAMIE
FREDRICKSON, and ALEXANDRA
KOHLHAAS,
Defendants.
This matter comes before the Court on the Stipulated Motion to Extend Case Progression
Deadlines (Filing No. 286). Upon review of the parties’ Stipulation,
IT IS ORDERED that the Stipulated Motion to Extend Case Progression Deadlines
(Filing No. 286) is granted, and the final progression order (amended) (Filing No. 255) is
amended as follows:
1)

The pretrial conference is cancelled and will be rescheduled at a later date.

2)

The deadline for completing written discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36 and 45 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure remains April 17, 2020, excluding
completion of the outstanding written discovery items identified by the parties
in paragraph 6 the Stipulated Motion to Extend Case Progression Deadlines
(Filing No. 286). Motions to compel written discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36
and 45 must be filed by July 31, 2020.
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 on or before the motion to compel deadline to set a conference to discuss
the parties’ dispute, and after being granted leave to do so by the Court.

3)

The deadline for moving to amend pleadings or add parties is September 4,
2020.

4)

The deposition deadline for fact witnesses is September 4, 2020.

5)

A status conference to discuss case progression and the parties’ interest in
settlement remains scheduled with the undersigned magistrate judge on
September 18, 2020, at 10:00 a.m. by telephone. Counsel shall use the
conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference.

6)

The deadlines for completing expert disclosures1 for all experts expected to
testify at trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and nonretained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are:
For the plaintiff:
For the defendants:
Plaintiff’s rebuttal:

November 13, 2020
December 9, 2021
January 4, 2021

7)

The deposition deadline for expert witnesses is January 4, 2021.

8)

A status conference to discuss dispositive motions, the pretrial conference and
trial dates, and settlement status will be held with the undersigned magistrate
judge on January 4, 2021, at 11:00 a.m. by telephone. Counsel shall use the
conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference.

9)

The deadline for filing motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment
is January 22, 2021.

10) The deadline for filing motions to exclude testimony on Daubert and related
grounds is February 22, 2021.
11) 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.
12) 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 14th day of April, 2020.
BY THE COURT:
s/Michael D. Nelson
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