United States District Court, E.D. California
STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER
reviewed the parties’ Joint Status Report filed on
September 3, 2019, the court makes the following orders:
SERVICE OF PROCESS
defendants named in the second amended complaint have been
served and no further service is permitted without leave of
court, good cause having been shown.
further joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings is
permitted without leave of court, good cause having been
shown. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b); Johnson v.
Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604 (9th Cir. 1992).
is predicated upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343.
Jurisdiction and venue are not disputed.
disclosures as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
26(a) shall be completed by October 1, 2019.
All discovery shall be completed by March 2,
2020. In this context, “completed” means
that all discovery shall have been conducted so that all
depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to
discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if
necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order
has been obeyed. All motions to compel discovery must be
noticed on the magistrate judge’s calendar in
accordance with the local rules of this court. While the
assigned magistrate judge reviews proposed discovery phase
protective orders, requests to seal or redact are decided by
Judge Mueller as discussed in more detail below. In addition,
while the assigned magistrate judge handles discovery
motions, the magistrate judge cannot change the schedule set
in this order, except that the magistrate judge may modify a
discovery cutoff to the extent such modification does not
have the effect of requiring a change to the balance of the
DISCLOSURE OF EXPERT WITNESSES
counsel are to designate in writing and serve upon all other
parties the name, address, and area of expertise of each
expert that they propose to tender at trial not later than
March 16, 2020. The designation shall be
accompanied by a written report prepared and signed by the
witness. The report shall comply with Fed.R.Civ.P.
26(a)(2)(B). By April 15, 2020, any party
who previously disclosed expert witnesses may submit a
rebuttal list of expert witnesses who will express an opinion
on a subject covered by an expert designated by an adverse
party, if the party rebutting an expert witness designation
has not previously retained an expert to testify on that
subject. The rebuttal designation shall be accompanied by a
written report, which shall also comply with the conditions
of a party to comply with the disclosure schedule as set
forth above in all likelihood will preclude that party from
calling the expert witness at the time of trial. An expert
witness not appearing on the designation will not be
permitted to testify unless the party offering the witness
demonstrates: (a) that the necessity for the witness could
not have been reasonably anticipated at the time the list was
proffered; (b) that the court and opposing counsel were
promptly notified upon discovery of the witness; and (c) that
the witness was promptly made available for deposition.
purposes of this scheduling order, an “expert” is
any person who may be used at trial to present evidence under
Rules 702, 703 and 705 of the Federal Rules of Evidence,
which include both “percipient experts” (persons
who, because of their expertise, have rendered expert
opinions in the normal course of their work duties or
observations pertinent to the issues in the case) and
“retained experts” (persons specifically
designated by a party to be a testifying expert for the
purposes of litigation). A party shall identify whether a
disclosed expert is percipient, retained, or both. It will be
assumed that a party designating a retained expert has
acquired the express permission of the witness to be so
listed. Parties designating percipient experts must state in
the designation who is responsible for arranging the
deposition of such persons.
experts designated are to be fully prepared at the time of
designation to render an informed opinion, and give the bases
for their opinion, so that they will be able to give full and
complete testimony at any deposition taken by the opposing
party. Experts will not be permitted to testify at trial as
to any information gathered or evaluated, or opinion formed,
after deposition taken ...