United States District Court, E.D. California
SCHEDULING ORDER (FED. R. CIV. P. 16)
JENNIFER L. THURSTON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Date of Scheduling Conference
Appearances of Counsel
Smith appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.
Sevila appeared on behalf of Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc.
Schreck appeared on behalf of Erik Mendoza.
Magistrate Judge Consent:
of Congested Docket and Court Policy of
the District Judges' heavy caseload, the newly adopted
policy of the Fresno Division of the Eastern District is to
trail all civil cases. The parties are hereby notified that
for a trial date set before a District Judge, the parties
will trail indefinitely behind any higher priority criminal
or older civil case set on the same date until a courtroom
becomes available. The trial date will not be reset to a
Magistrate Judges' availability is far more realistic and
accommodating to parties than that of the U.S. District
Judges who carry the heaviest caseloads in the nation and who
must prioritize criminal and older civil cases over more
recently filed civil cases. A United States Magistrate Judge
may 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. Any appeal from a judgment
entered by a United States Magistrate Judge is taken directly
to the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit.
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, such
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
the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate
Judge jurisdiction to conduct all further proceedings,
including trial. Within 10 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 Judge.
Pleading Amendment Deadline
requested pleading amendments are ordered to be filed, either
through a stipulation or motion to amend, no later than
June 25, 2019. Any motion to amend the
pleadings shall be heard by the Honorable Dale A. Drozd,
United States District Court Judge.
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 April
parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to
non-experts on or before February 15, 2019,
and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before
April 12, 2019.
parties are directed to disclose all expert
witnesses, in writing, on or before March 1, 2019,
and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before March 22,
2019. 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.
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
provisions of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(e) regarding a party's duty
to timely supplement disclosures and responses to ...