Saevik v. Swedish Medical Center et al

Filing 45

ORDER: Jury Trial is continued to 1/24/2022 before U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour. Discovery now to be completed by 9/26/2021, Dispositive motions now due by 10/26/2021, Attorney settlement conference now to be held by 11/17/2021, 39 .1 mediation now to be completed by 12/24/2021, Motions in Limine now due by 12/31/2021, Agreed pretrial Order and Trial Briefs now due by 1/19/2022. Defendants' motion to continue (Dkt. No. 35 ) is GRANTED and Plaintiff's motion to compel (Dkt. No. 33 ) is DENIED without prejudice. The Court declines Defendants' request for fees, (see Dkt. No. 37 at 9). Signed by U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour. (LH)

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

SHANNON ANDERSON SAEVIK,

10
11
12
13
14

v.

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. C19-1992-JCC
ORDER

SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER and
REBECCA DAY, individually and as Clinic
Operations Manager of its Organ Transplant
and Live Center,
Defendants.

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

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion to compel (Dkt. No. 33) and
Defendants’ motion to continue trial and revise the pretrial schedule (Dkt. No. 35.) Having
considered the parties’ briefing and the relevant record, and finding oral argument unnecessary,
the Court hereby DENIES without prejudice Plaintiff’s motion to compel and GRANTS
Defendants’ motion to continue for the reasons described herein.
Plaintiff, who alleges that Defendant Swedish Medical Center (“Swedish”) botched a
medical procedure performed on her and then unlawfully fired her, brings wrongful discharge
and related claims against Swedish and Plaintiff’s superior at Swedish, Rebecca Day. (See Dkt.
No. 1-3.) The discovery cut off in this matter is presently set for June 7, 2021, dispositive
motions are due July 16, 2021 and trial is scheduled for October 7, 2021. (Dkt. No. 30.)

ORDER
C19-1992-JCC
PAGE - 1

1

Defendants move to continue the discovery period and resulting deadlines. (Dkt. No. 35.)

2

They indicate Plaintiff only recently produced, and/or Defendants only recently received,

3

information necessary to depose Plaintiff. (See Dkt. No. 36.) In addition, the parties have not yet

4

agreed on the scope of the deposition of Swedish’s Rule 30(b)(6) representative. (See Dkt. No.

5

33-3 at 2.) Given the delay in production to date and the outstanding depositions sought by the

6

parties, (see Dkt. Nos. 33 at 3, 35 at 8–9), the Court finds good cause to modify the remaining

7

case management dates, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). Case management dates are revised as

8

follows:
Case Management Event

Revised Due Date

10

Discovery cut off

September 26, 2021

11

Dispositive motions

October 26, 2021

12

Settlement conference

November 17, 2021

13

Rule 39.1 mediation letter of compliance

December 24, 2021

14

Motions in limine1

December 31, 2021

15

Proposed jury instructions, verdict form 2 and voir dire

January 14, 2022

16

Agreed pretrial order and trial briefs

January 19, 2022

17

Trial date 3

January 24, 2022

9

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

//
1

Any objections or responses to the motions in limine must be filed no later than seven
days from service of the motion.
2

The Court relies primarily upon the Ninth Circuit Manual for Model Jury Instructions to
prepare final instructions for submission to the jury. Two sets of course-of-trial and end-of-trial
jury instructions and a verdict form should be submitted. One set should be numbered
sequentially, with citations, indicating whether the instruction is agreed or disputed. A second,
clean copy without numbering, citations, or indication whether the instruction is agreed or
disputed should be submitted. All standard jury instructions should be included. The proposed
instructions and the verdict form should also be submitted in word format to the following e-mail
address: [e-mail].
3

The pretrial conference, currently set for October 7, 2021, is VACATED. If a
conference becomes necessary, the Court will address a date for it at the parties’ request.
ORDER
C19-1992-JCC
PAGE - 2

1

Separately, Plaintiffs move to compel production of Swedish’s Rule 30(b)(6) deponent.

2

(Dkt. No. 33.) In doing so, Plaintiff includes a meet and confer certification. (Id. at 3, see Dkt.

3

No. 33-2 at 3.) But Plaintiff’s certification is inadequate—a discovery conference occurring more

4

than two months prior is not a good faith attempt to meet and confer to resolve the parties’

5

differences regarding the present scope of the deposition of Swedish’s Rule 30(b)(6)

6

representative. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); W.D. Wash. Local Civ. R. 37(a)(1). If, following

7

Plaintiff’s good faith attempt to meet and confer, Swedish refuses to provide a representative for

8

a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, Plaintiff may renew her motion to compel.

9

For the reasons described above, Defendants’ motion to continue (Dkt. No. 35) is

10

GRANTED and Plaintiff’s motion to compel (Dkt. No. 33) is DENIED without prejudice. The

11

Court declines Defendants’ request for fees, (see Dkt. No. 37 at 9), finding that such an award

12

would be unjust in this instance. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(B).

13
14

DATED this 4th day of June 2021.

A

15
16
17

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER
C19-1992-JCC
PAGE - 3