UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 25, 2011
COACH, INC. A MARYLAND CORPORATION;
COACH SERVICES, INC. A MARYLAND CORPORATION,
SASSY SCISSOR CUTS, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jennifer L. Thurston United States Magistrate Judge
AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER
(Fed. R. Civ. P. 16) Pleading Amendment Deadline: 9/23/2011 Discovery Deadlines: Non Expert: 2/17/2012 Expert: 4/13/2012 9:30 Mid-Discovery Status Conference:11/16/11, 9:30 a.m. Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 4/20/2012 Hearing: 5/18/2012 Dispositive Motion Deadlines:
Filing: 5/25/2012 Hearing: 7/16/2012 Pre-Trial Conference:
9/6/2012 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 2 Trial: 11/6/2012 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 2 Jury trial: 3-5 days
I. Date of Scheduling Conference
August 10, 2011.
II. Appearances of Counsel
Brent Blakely appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Jonathan McMahon appeared on behalf of Defendant.
III. Pleading Amendment
Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint joining additional parties who have been identified as suppliers of the products at issue no later than September 23, 2011.
IV. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date
The parties have exchanged the initial disclosures required by Fed .R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1).
The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before February 17, 2012, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before April 13, 2012.
The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, on or before February 24, 2012, and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before March 16, 2012. The written designation of retained and non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A), (B), and (C) and shall include all information required thereunder.
Failure to designate experts in compliance with this order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other evidence offered through such experts that are not disclosed pursuant to this order.
The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) and (5) shall apply to all discovery relating to experts and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions included in the designation. Failure to comply will result in the imposition of sanctions, which may include striking the expert designation and preclusion of expert testimony.
The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party's duty to timely supplement disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced.
A telephonic mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for November 16, 2011, at 9:30 am, before the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, U.S. Magistrate Judge, located at 1200 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 120, Bakersfield, California, 93301. A Joint Mid-Discovery Status Conference Report, carefully prepared and executed by all counsel, shall be electronically filed in CM/ECF, one (1) full week prior to the Conference, and shall be e-mailed, in WordPerfect or Word format, to firstname.lastname@example.org. Counsel SHALL appear by telephone.
V. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule
All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later than April 20, 2012, and heard on or before May 18, 2012. Non-dispositive motions are heard at 9:00 a.m., before the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, United States Magistrate Judge at the United States Bankruptcy Courtroom at 1300 18th Street, Bakersfield, California.
No written discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the assigned Magistrate Judge. A party with a discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve by agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the moving party promptly shall seek a telephonic hearing with all involved parties and the Magistrate Judge. It shall be the obligation of the moving party to arrange and originate the conference call to the court. To schedule this telephonic hearing, the parties are ordered to contact Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Alan Leon-Guerrero at (661) 326-6624 or via email at ALeonGuerrero@caed.uscourts.gov. Counsel must comply with Local Rule 251 with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied without prejudice and dropped from calendar.
In scheduling such motions, the Magistrate Judge may grant applications for an order shortening time pursuant to Local Rule 144(3). However, if counsel does not obtain an order shortening time, the notice of motion must comply with Local Rule 251.
Counsel may appear and argue non-dispositive motions by telephone, providing a written request to so appear is made to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Clerk no later than five (5) court days before the noticed hearing date. In the event that more than one attorney requests to appear by telephone then it shall be the obligation of the moving part(ies) to arrange and originate a conference call to the court.
All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than May 25, 2012, and heard no later than July 16, 2012, at 1:30 p.m., in Courtroom 2 before the Honorable Anthony
W. Ishii, United States District Court Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed.R.Civ.P 56 and Local Rules 230 and 260.
VI. Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication Prior to filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for summary adjudication the parties are ORDERED to meet, in person or by telephone, and confer to discuss the issues to be raised in the motion.
The purpose of the meeting shall be to: 1) avoid filing motions for summary judgment where a question of fact exists; 2) determine whether the respondent agrees that the motion has merit in whole or in part; 3) discuss whether issues can be resolved without the necessity of briefing; 4) narrow the issues for review by the court; 5) explore the possibility of settlement before the parties incur the expense of briefing a summary judgment motion; 6) to arrive at a joint statement of undisputed facts.
The moving party shall initiate the meeting and provide a draft of the joint statement of undisputed facts. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260 the moving party shall file a joint statement of undisputed facts.
In the notice of motion the moving party shall certify that the parties have met and conferred as ordered above or set forth a statement of good cause for the failure to meet and confer.
VII. Pre-Trial Conference Date
September 6, 2012, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 2 before Judge Ishii.
The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pretrial Statement pursuant
to Local Rule 281(a)(2). The parties are further directed to submit a
digital copy of their pretrial statement in Word Perfect X4*fn1
format, directly to Judge Ishii's chambers by email at
Counsels' attention is directed to Rules 281 and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the pre-trial conference. The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules. In addition to the matters set forth in the Local Rules the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include a Joint Statement of the case to be used by the Court to explain the nature of the case to the jury during voir dire.
VIII. Trial Date
November 6, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 2 before the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii, United States District Court Judge.
A. This is a jury trial.
B. Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 3-5 days.
C. Counsel's attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California, Rule 285.
IX. Settlement Conference
The parties request that no settlement conference be set at this time. Should the parties jointly agree at later time that a settlement conference would be fruitful, they may file a joint request that the Court schedule a settlement conference.
X. Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other Techniques to Shorten Trial Not applicable at this time.
XI. Related Matters Pending
There are no pending related matters.
XII. Compliance with Federal Procedure
All counsel are expected to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep abreast of any amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to efficiently handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow the Rules as provided in both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California.
XIII. Effect of this Order
The foregoing order represents the best estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most suitable to dispose of this case. The trial date reserved is specifically reserved for this case. If the parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met, counsel are ordered to notify the court immediately of that fact so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by subsequent status conference.
The dates set in this Order are considered to be firm and will not be modified absent a showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. Stipulations extending the deadlines contained herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached exhibits, which establish good cause for granting the relief requested.
Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.