ZO Skin Health, Inc. v. Sheena

Filing 29

STRICKEN - AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER that the Parties' Joint Stipulation to Extend Progression Deadlines. (Filing No. 28 .) The motion is granted. The trial and pretrial conference will not be set at this time. The status conference p resently scheduled for June 2, 2020 is canceled. A 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 by telep hone on June 29, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. (Filing No. 14 .) The deposition deadline is July 1, 2021. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LAC) Modified on 11/20/2020 to strike per #30 Text Order(LAC).

8:20-cv-00060-BCB-SMB Doc # 29 Filed: 11/20/20 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID # 153

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
ZO SKIN HEALTH, INC., a California
corporation;
Plaintiff,
vs.
MICHAEL SHEENA, an individual;

8:20CV60
AMENDED FINAL
PROGRESSION ORDER

Defendant.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Parties’ Joint Stipulation to Extend Progression
Deadlines. (Filing No. 28.) The motion is granted. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the provisions of the Court’s earlier final progression order remain
in effect, and in addition to those provision, progression shall be amended as follows:
1)

The trial and pretrial conference will not be set at this time. The status conference
presently scheduled for June 2, 2020 is canceled. A 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 by
telephone on June 29, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. Counsel shall use the conferencing
instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. (Filing No. 14.)

2)

The deadlines for moving to amend pleadings or add parties are:
For the plaintiff(s):
For the defendant(s):

3)

December 21, 2020
December 21, 2020

The deadline for completing written discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36 and 45 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is March 19, 2021. Motions to compel written
discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36 and 45 must be filed by April 5, 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.

4)

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):
For the defendant(s):
Rebuttal:

April 19, 2021
May 17, 2021
June 17, 2021

8:20-cv-00060-BCB-SMB Doc # 29 Filed: 11/20/20 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID # 154

5)

The deadlines for complete expert disclosures 1 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):
For the defendant(s):
Rebuttal:

6)

April 19, 2021
May 17, 2021
June 17, 2021

The deposition deadline, including but not limited to depositions for oral testimony
only under Rule 45, is July 1, 2021.
a. The maximum number of depositions that may be taken by the plaintiffs as
a group and the defendants as a group is 6.
b. Depositions will be limited by Rule 30(d)(1).

7)

The deadline for filing motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment is
July 30, 2021.

8)

The deadline for filing motions to exclude testimony on Daubert and related
grounds is July 30, 2021.

9)

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.

10)

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 20th 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