STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER
After reviewing defendant's Status Report filed on February 17, 2009 and joined by plaintiff on March 17, 2009, the court makes the following orders:
All named defendants have been served and no further service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown.
II. ADDITIONAL PARTIES/AMENDMENTS/PLEADINGS
No further joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown. See Fed. R. Civ. P.16 (b); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604 (9th Cir. 1992).
Jurisdiction is predicated upon 28 U.S.C. § 1332 , and Venue on 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). Jurisdiction and venue are not disputed.
Discovery pre-certification shall be completed by May 1, 2009, andDiscovery post-certification shall be completed by January 15, 2010. In this context, "completed" means that all discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been obeyed. All motions to compel discovery must be noticed on the magistrate judge's calendar in accordance with the local rules of this court.
V. DISCLOSURE OF EXPERT WITNESSES
The Court hereby sets a pre-certification expert witness disclosure schedule as follows:
(a) All counsel are to designate in writing, file with the court, and serve upon all other parties the name, address, and area of expertise of each expert that they propose. Pre-certification expert disclosure for plaintiff is due May 15, 2009, and defendant's expert disclosure is due June 26, 2009. The designations shall be accompanied by a written report prepared and signed by the witness;
(b) Rebuttal expert disclosures are due by July 17, 2009; and
(c) All pre-certification expert discovery shall be completed by August 17, 2009.
The Court hereby sets a post-certification expert witness disclosure schedule. All counsel are to designate in writing, file with the court, and serve upon all other parties the name, address, and area of expertise of each expert that they propose to tender at trial. Plaintiff's expert disclosure is due by January 29, 2010, and defendant's expert disclosure is due by February 12, 2010. The designations shall be accompanied by a written report prepared and signed by the witness. The report shall comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B). By March 4, 2010, any party who previously disclosed expert witnesses may submit a supplemental list of expert witnesses who will express an opinion on a subject covered by an expert designated by an adverse party, if the party supplementing an expert witness designation has not previously retained an expert to testify on that subject. The supplemental designation shall be accompanied by a written report which shall also comply with the conditions as stated above.
Failure of a party to comply with the disclosure schedule as set forth above in all likelihood will preclude that party from calling the expert witness at the time of trial. An expert witness not appearing on the designation will not be permitted to testify unless the party offering the witness demonstrates: (a) that the necessity for the witness could not have been reasonably anticipated at the time the list was proffered; (b) that the court and opposing counsel were promptly notified upon discovery of the witness; and (c) that the witness was promptly made available for deposition.
For purposes of this scheduling order, an "expert" is any person who my be used at trial to present evidence under Rules 702, 703, and 705 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which include both "percipient experts" (persons who, because of their expertise, have rendered expert opinions in the normal course of their work duties or observations pertinent to the issues in the case) and "retained experts" (persons specifically designated by a party to be a testifying expert for the purposes of litigation). Each party shall identify whether a disclosed expert is percipient, retained, or both. It will be assumed that a party designating a retained expert has acquired the express ...