Lee v. United States of America

Filing 28

ORDER that 24 Motion to Extend Pretrial Deadlines (Second Joint Request) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED to the extent that the discovery cutoff is extended until May 19, 2016, the deadline for filing dispositive moti on is extended until June 10, 2016, and the deadline for filing the joint pretrial order is extended until July 12, 2016. The parties shall have until January 8, 2016, to file a joint status report identifying any discovery disputes that the parties were unable to resolve without court intervention. A status and dispute resolution hearing is set for January 19, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 12/3/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

THEODORE LEE,

Case No. 2:14-cv-00606-RCJ-PAL

8
9
10

Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
(Jt. Mot Ext – Dkt. #24)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

11
12

The court set the parties’ Joint Motion for Extension of Pretrial Deadlines (Second Joint

13

Request) (Dkt. #24) for hearing on November 30, 2015. Counsel for Plaintiff did not appear.

14

Staff was initially told that Attorney Mark Bailus was on his way and expected to arrive any

15

moment for the hearing. Chambers was later contacted and told that Mr. Bailus was in state

16

court. E. Carmen Ramirez appeared telephonically on behalf of the United States.

17

The parties requested a 120-day extension of the discovery plan and scheduling order

18

deadlines for various reasons.

19

administrative and international law, the Plaintiff and non-party witnesses live and work outside

20

the country, and the parties have a number of discovery disputes. Counsel for Plaintiff had

21

emergency open heart surgery and has been in recovery only returning to work on September

22

2015. The parties have been working on attempting to resolve their discovery disputes without

23

the court’s intervention, and need an opportunity to engage in further good-faith negotiation.

24

Both sides have agreed to review their discovery responses and provide supplemental responses

25

if appropriate. Finally, counsel for Plaintiff has indicated he intends to submit an offer to settle

26

this case. The process for the United States to review and decide whether or not to accept an

27

offer is time consuming.

First, this case is involves potentially complex issues of

28
1

1

The joint motion initially advised the court that the parties intended to have a second

2

meet-and-confer session on November 24, 2015.

However, counsel for the United States

3

indicated this did not occur. The deadline for designating expert witnesses expired November

4

24, 2015, and neither side disclosed experts. The United States does not know when Mr. Ord

5

intends to make an offer. The United States expects to receive responses to supplemental

6

discovery it served sometime next week, and may supplement its own discovery responses by

7

next week.

8

The court set this matter for hearing because it appeared unlikely the parties will be able

9

to comply with their proposed May 19, 2016, extended discovery cutoff given their unresolved

10

discovery disputes, and the amount of discovery that remains. Additionally, this motion was

11

filed four days before the deadline to designate experts, not twenty-one days before the

12

expiration of the deadline as required by LR 26-4. Finally, the parties did not comply with the

13

requirements of LR 26-4 by specifying the discovery completed to date, providing a specific

14

description of the discovery that remains to be completed, or a proposed schedule for completing

15

all remaining discovery other than requesting a 120-day further extension.

16

The court will approve the parties’ request for a 120-day extension of the existing

17

discovery cutoff, but deny the request for an extension of the deadline to designate experts. The

18

court will also impose a deadline for the parties to complete their meet-and-confer process to

19

either resolve their discovery disputes without court intervention, or present them to the court for

20

a decision in a reasonable period of time to ensure the May 19, 2016, extended discovery cutoff

21

is a viable deadline.

22

IT IS ORDERED that:

23

1. The parties Joint Motion for Extension of Pretrial Deadlines (Second Joint Request)

24

(Dkt. #24) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED

25

to the extent that the discovery cutoff is extended until May 19, 2016, the deadline

26

for filing dispositive motion is extended until June 10, 2016, and the deadline for

27

filing the joint pretrial order is extended until July 12, 2016.

28
2

1
2
3
4
5
6

2. In the event dispositive motions are filed, the date for filing the joint pretrial order
shall be suspended until 30 days after a decision of the dispositive motions.
3. The disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3), and any objections thereto, shall
be included in the pretrial order.
4. The parties’ request for an extension of the deadline to designate experts and rebuttal
experts is DENIED.

7

5. The parties shall have until December 18, 2015, to complete the meet-and-confer

8

process to determine whether they have resolved their discovery disputes or have

9

reached an impasse.

10

6. The parties shall have until January 8, 2016, to file a joint status report identifying

11

any discovery disputes that the parties were unable to resolve without court

12

intervention. The parties shall be required to meet and confer sufficiently in advance

13

to prepare a joint status report which articulates any discovery disputes and the

14

parties’ positions regarding those disputes with sufficient specificity to allow the

15

court to resolve them without the need for further formal briefing. If the parties have

16

been able to resolve their disputes without court intervention, the parties’ joint status

17

report should so indicate and the hearing will be automatically vacated.

18

7. A status and dispute resolution hearing is set for January 19, 2016, at 9:30 a.m.

19

DATED this 3rd day of December, 2015.

20
21
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3