United States District Court, S.D. California
WILLIAM J. CANNON, Plaintiff,
AUSTAL USA LLC AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTION TO
AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER [ECF No. 62]
Barbara L. Major United States Magistrate Judge
before the Court is Plaintiff's April 3, 2017 motion to
amend scheduling order [ECF No. 62-1 (“Mot.”)],
Third Party Defendant Austal USA, LLC'S April 10, 2017
response [ECF No. 66 (“Response”)], Defendant
United States of America's April 11, 2017 opposition to
the motion [ECF No. 68 (“Oppo.”)], and
Plaintiff's April 18, 2017 Reply [ECF No. 71
(“Reply”)]. For the reasons set forth below,
Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED.
April 3, 2017, Plaintiff filed an “Ex Parte Motion to
Amend Scheduling Order.” ECF No. 62. The Court issued a
briefing schedule on April 4, 2017. Id. In
accordance with that schedule, the parties timely filed their
motion, opposition, response, and reply. See Id.;
see also Mot., Oppo., Response, and Reply.
20, 2016, Defendant Austal responded to Defendant USA's
Interrogatories, Set One which asked Austal to identify all
“personnel working with Plaintiff at the time of the
alleged incident.” Mot. at 9; see also ECF No.
62-2, Declaration of Thomas M. Discon in Support of
Complainant, William J. Cannon's Ex Parte Motion
(“Discon Decl.”), at Exh. 5. Defendant Austal
responded “[n]one]. According to Plaintiff's
complaint he ‘was attempting to pick up and move lifts
with three Navy personnel…'” Id.
29, 2016, Plaintiff propounded Interrogatories on Austal
requesting “the names, addresses, telephone numbers,
social security numbers, driver's license numbers and
position of each and every person known to Defendant, who may
have any knowledge of the facts relevant to this
lawsuit.” Mot. at 8-9; see also Discon Decl.
at Exh. 4. Austal responded on August 31, 2016 with the names
of four individuals. Id.
August 25, 2016, Plaintiff served Defendant USA with requests
for production of documents which sought “[e]very
accident report, report of first injury, illness and/or
ailment report, and/or root cause analysis report with
respect to complainant, which was made by any agent,
employee, or representative of any party or insurer or any
party designated above or any governmental agency.”
Mot. at 15-16; see also Discon Decl. at Exh. 11.
Defendant USA objected to the request and stated that it had
“no documents responsive to this request.”
December 27, 2016, Defendant Austal responded to Defendant
USA's Interrogatories, Set Two which asked Austal to
identify “all of your personnel who were aboard the
U.S.S. CORONADO (LCS-4) at any time on November 25,
2013” and “all of your Safety Officers who were
assigned to U.S.S. CORONADO (LCS-4) at any time from August
7, 2013 through and including November 25, 2013.” Mot.
at 9; see also Discon Decl. at Exh. 6. Defendant
Austal objected to the requests, but listed seventeen names.
February 17, 2017, Austal served First Supplemental Initial
Disclosures which included twenty-three new fact witnesses.
Mot. at 14; see also Discon Decl. at Exh. 9. On
February 24, 2017, Austal served Corrected First Supplemental
Initial Disclosures that narrowed the twenty-three witnesses
down to seven witnesses including Tony Ardito, Susan
Brigitha, Dan Goergen, Dave Growden, Thomas
“Tommy” Mendiola, Paul Quinn and Steve
Williamson. Mot. at 14; see also Discon
Decl. at Exh. 10. Fact discovery closed on February 27, 2017.
ECF No. 51 at 2.
investigating on his own, Plaintiff discovered the identity
of Ms. Felicia London, a female safety officer employed by
Austal, who took a report of Plaintiff's accident on
November 25, 2013. Mot. at 11-12. On March 27, 2017, counsel
for Plaintiff contacted Ms. London and got a sworn and
notarized statement from her indicating:
(1) that she was aboard the USS Coronado on the date of
Complainant, Mr. Cannon's, accident; (2) that she
witnessed Mr. Cannon, several Austal employees and Naval
personnel surrounding the ramp extension at issue in this
case immediately following the accident herein; (3) that Mr.
Cannon informed her that he sustained an injury in an
accident; (4) that she noted the names of inviduals involved
in the accident, including Naval officers; (5) that she
informed all witnesses at that time of their obligation to
furnish a statement concerning Mr. Cannon's accident; (6)
that she attempted to collect said statements from Naval
officers in the SUPSHIP Naval building, but did not collect
any; (7) that she completed an incident report concerning Mr.
Cannon's accident, which she printed and saved on the
safety office computer; and (8) that she placed a copy of
said incident report in a fellow safety officer, Timothy
“Blake” Thomas's, file for review.
Id. at 12; see also Discon Decl. at Exh. 8.
March 29, 2017, Plaintiff's counsel met and conferred
with counsel for Austal. Mot. at 4; see also Discon
Decl. at Exh. 2. Austal did not oppose Plaintiff's
request to reopen discovery, but reserved its right to object
or oppose further discovery until after Plaintiff served it
with formal discovery ...