United States District Court, N.D. California
LEE S. BAGLEY, Plaintiff,
CITY OF SUNNYVALE, et al., Defendants.
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
the further Case Management Conference held on November 9,
2017, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
to Move to Amend Pleadings: January 11, 2018
Fact Discovery Cut-Off:
May 4, 2018
Expert Witness Disclosures:
May 25, 2018
Rebuttal Expert Witness Disclosures:
June 15, 2018
Expert Discovery Cutoff:
July 13, 2018
Deadline for Hearing Dispositive Motions:
September 6, 2018
further Case Management Conference is scheduled for March 22,
2018 in Courtroom F, 450 Golden Gate Ave., San Francisco, CA.
An updated Joint Case Management Conference Statement is due
March 15, 2018.
parties are referred to the Court's ADR program for an
early neutral evaluation to occur within the next 120 days.
With the agreement of the evaluator, the parties may decide
to pursue mediation or a hybrid mediation/ene.
trial will begin on December 10, 2018, at 8:30 a.m., in
Courtroom F, 15th Floor, U.S. District Court, 450 Golden
Gate, San Francisco, California.
Court is expecting the length of the trial to not exceed 5
Pretrial Conference shall be held on November 15, 2018, at
2:00 p.m., in Courtroom F, 15th Floor. Lead trial counsel for
each party shall attend.
least seven days prior to date of the Final Pretrial
Conference the parties shall do the following:
1. In lieu of preparing a Joint Pretrial Conference
Statement, the parties shall meet and confer in person, and
then prepare and file a jointly signed Proposed Final
Pretrial Order that contains: (a) a brief description of the
substance of claims and defenses which remain to be decided;
(b) a statement of all relief sought; (c) all stipulated
facts; (d) a joint exhibit list in numerical order, including
a brief description of the exhibit and Bates numbers, a blank
column for when it will be offered into evidence, a blank
column for when it may be received into evidence, and a blank
column for any limitations on its use; and (e) each
party's separate witness list for its case-in-chief
witnesses (including those appearing by deposition),
including, for all such witnesses (other than party
plaintiffs or defendants), a short statement of the substance
of his/her testimony and, separately, what, if any,
non-cumulative testimony the witness will offer. For each
witness, state an hour/minute time estimate for the direct
examination (only). Items (d) and (e) should be submitted as
appendices to the proposed order. The proposed order should
also state which issues, if any, are for the Court to decide,
rather than the jury.
2. File a joint set of proposed instructions on substantive
issues of law arranged in a logical sequence. If undisputed,
an instruction shall be identified as “Stipulated
Instruction No. ____ Re ____, ” with the blanks filled
in as appropriate. If disputed, each version of the
instruction shall be inserted together, back to back, in
their logical place in the overall sequence. Each such
disputed instruction shall be identified as, for example,
“Disputed Instruction No. ____ Re ____ Offered by____,
” with the blanks filled in as appropriate. All
disputed versions of the same basic instruction shall bear
the same number. Any modifications to a form instruction must
be plainly identified. If a party does not have a counter
version and simply contends that no such instruction in any
version should be given, then that party should so state (and
explain why) on a separate page inserted in lieu of an
alternate version. With respect to form preliminary
instructions, general instructions, or concluding
instructions, please simply cite to the numbers of the
requested instructions in the current edition of the Ninth
Circuit Model Jury Instructions. Other than citing the
numbers, the parties shall not include preliminary, general,
or concluding instructions in the packet.
a separate memorandum of law in support of each party's
disputed instructions, if any, organized by instruction
a joint set of proposed voir dire questions supplemented as
necessary by separate requests.
trial briefs on any controlling issues of law.
proposed verdict ...