United States District Court, E.D. California
AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P.
Jennifer L. Thurston United States Magistrate Judge
Amendment Deadline: 10/17/2016 Discovery Deadlines:
Disclosures: 8/8/2016 Non-Expert: 5/26/2017 Expert: 8/4/2017
Mid-Discovery Status Conference: 3/7/2017 at 8:30 a.m.
Motion Deadlines: Filing: 8/18/2017 Hearing: 9/15/2017
Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filing: 9/29/2017 Hearing:
11/13/2017 Settlement Conference:
at 1:30 p.m.
19th Street, Bakersfield, CA Pre-Trial Conference:
at 10:00 a.m. Courtroom 2 Trial: 3/6/2018 at 8:30 a.m.
Courtroom 2 Jury trial: 5-7 days
Date of Scheduling Conference
Appearances of Counsel
Rumph appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.
Paetkau appeared on behalf of Defendant ABS Global, Inc.
Braze appeared on behalf of Defendant Pro Vita Animal Health,
Information Concerning the Court’s
fairness, the Court believes it is necessary to forewarn
litigants that the Fresno Division of the Eastern District of
California now has the heaviest District Court Judge caseload
in the entire nation. While the Court will use its best
efforts to resolve this case and all other civil cases in a
timely manner, the parties are admonished that not all of the
parties’ needs and expectations may be met as
expeditiously as desired. As multiple trials are now being
set to begin upon the same date, parties may find their case
trailing with little notice before the trial begins. The law
requires that the Court give any criminal trial priority over
civil trials or any other matter. The Court must proceed with
a criminal trial even if a civil trial was filed earlier and
set for trial first. Continuances of any civil trial under
these circumstances will no longer be entertained, absent a
specific and stated finding of good cause. All parties should
be informed that any civil trial set to begin during the time
a criminal trial is proceeding will trail the completion of
the criminal trial.
parties are reminded of the availability of a United States
Magistrate Judge to conduct all proceedings in this action. A
United States Magistrate Judge is available to conduct
trials, including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, and
Local Rule 305. The same jury pool is used by both United
States Magistrate Judges and United States District Court
Judges. Any appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate
Judge is taken directly to the United States Court of Appeal
for the Ninth Circuit. However, the parties are hereby
informed that no substantive rulings or decisions will be
affected by whether a party chooses to consent.
the Fresno Division of the Eastern District of California,
whenever possible, is utilizing United States Article III
District Court Judges from throughout the nation as Visiting
Judges. Pursuant to the Local Rules, Appendix A,
reassignments will be random, and the parties will receive no
advance notice before their case is reassigned to an Article
III District Court Judge from outside of the Eastern District
consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction on the record
during the Scheduling Conference. Defendants are directed to
consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to
conduct all further proceedings, including trial.
Within 21 days of the date of this
order, counsel SHALL file a consent/decline form (provided by
the Court at the inception of this case) indicating whether
they will consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate
Pleading Amendment Deadline
requested pleading amendments are ordered to be filed, either
through a stipulation or motion to amend, no later than
October 17, 2016.
Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date
parties are ordered to exchange the initial disclosures
required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1) on or before August 8,
parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to
non-experts on or before May 26, 2017, and all discovery