IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 11, 2010
JACK SANDOVAL, PLAINTIFF,
ALLIED WASTE TRANSPORTATION, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 60, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER
The status (pretrial scheduling) conference scheduled for August 23, 2010, is vacated since the parties' Joint Status Report filed on August 9, 2010 ("JSR"), indicates that the following Order should issue.
Plaintiff states in the JSR that he "has not yet identified any Doe Defendants[,]" and "expects to complete discovery sufficient to identify the existence of Doe Defendants, if any, within ninety (90) days." (Doc. 7, 2:4-6.) Plaintiff shall conduct discovery pertinent to identify the existence of Doe defendants forthwith, and is authorized to seek the referenced amendment under Rule 15 provided that the motion in which leave is sought is filed no later than November 8, 2010. The motion shall be noticed for hearing on the earliest available regularly scheduled law and motion hearing date. If leave is not sought as stated, Does 1 through 60 will be dismissed from this action automatically as of the date on which the motion was required to be filed.
ADDED DEFENDANT'S OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK AMENDMENT OF THIS ORDER
If Plaintiff substitutes a named defendant in place of a Doe defendant, a copy of this Order shall be served on that defendant concurrently with the service of process. That defendant has 30 days after service within which to file a "Notice of Proposed Modification of Status Order." Although a newly-joined party's proposed modification filed within this thirty day period will not have to meet Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16's good cause standard, no further amendments will be permitted except with leave of Court for good cause shown.
AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS
Plaintiff also states in the JSR that he "is considering whether to seek leave to amend the Complaint to include additional claims for unpaid wages." (Id. 2:8-9.) Since Plaintiff failed to indicate when he will be able to determine if he will seek to amend his Complaint in this manner, he has until November 8, 2010, to file a motion in which he seeks leave to amend the Complaint to include additional claims for unpaid wages under Rule 15 of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. No further amendment to the pleadings is permitted, and no joinder of a party is permitted, except with leave of Court upon a showing of good cause.
All discovery shall be completed by July 1, 2011. 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 orders, if necessary, and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been complied with or, alternatively, the time allowed for such compliance shall have expired.
Each party shall comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(c)(i)'s initial expert witness disclosure requirements on or before February 1, 2011, and any contradictory and/or rebuttal expert disclosure authorized under Rule 26(a)(2)(c)(ii) on or before March 1, 2011.
MOTION HEARING SCHEDULE
The last hearing date for motions shall be September 12, 2011, at 9:00 a.m.*fn1
Motions shall be filed in accordance with Local Rule 230(b). Opposition papers shall be filed in accordance with Local Rule 230(c). Failure to comply with this local rule may be deemed consent to the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily. Brydges v. Lewis, 18 F.3d 651, 652-53 (9th Cir. 1994). Further, failure to timely oppose a summary judgment motion may result in the granting of that motion if the movant shifts the burden to the non-movant to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact remains for trial. Cf. Marshall v. Gates, 44 F.3d 722 (9th Cir. 1995).
The parties are cautioned that an untimely motion characterized as a motion in limine may be summarily denied. A motion in limine addresses the admissibility of evidence.
FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
The final pretrial conference is set for November 7, 2011, at 1:30 p.m. The parties are cautioned that the lead attorney who WILL TRY THE CASE for each party shall attend the final pretrial conference. In addition, all persons representing themselves and appearing in propria persona must attend the pretrial conference.
The parties are warned that non-trial worthy issues could be eliminated sua sponte "[i]f the pretrial conference discloses that no material facts are in dispute and that the undisputed facts entitle one of the parties to judgment as a matter of law." Portsmouth Square v. S'holders Protective Comm., 770 F.2d 866, 869 (9th Cir. 1985).
The parties shall file a JOINT pretrial statement no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the final pretrial conference.*fn2 The joint pretrial statement shall specify the issues for trial, including a description of each theory of liability and affirmative defense, and shall estimate the length of the trial.*fn3 The Court uses the parties' joint pretrial statement to prepare its final pretrial order and could issue the final pretrial order without holding the scheduled final pretrial conference. See Mizwicki v. Helwig, 196 F.3d 828, 833 (7th Cir. 1999) ("There is no requirement that the court hold a pretrial conference.").
If possible, at the time of filing the joint pretrial statement counsel shall also email it in a format compatible with WordPerfect to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Trial shall commence at 9:00 a.m. on February 7, 2012.
IT IS SO ORDERED.