United States District Court, N.D. California
LORIN L. FRENCH, Plaintiff,
YRC WORLDWIDE INC., Defendant.
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
the Initial Case Management Conference held on December 5,
2019, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE
Deadline to Move to Amend Pleadings:
January 6, 2020
Fact Discovery Cut-Off:
August 10, 2020
Deadline for Hearing Dispositive Motions:
August 13, 2020
Expert Witness Disclosures:
September 14, 2020
Rebuttal Expert Witness Disclosures:
October 12, 2020
Expert Discovery Cutoff:
October 26, 2020
case is referred to a randomly assigned magistrate judge for
a settlement conference to occur in the next 120 days. If the
magistrate judge determines after consultation with the
parties that it does not make sense to have the settlement
conference within that timeframe, the parties shall notify
the Court and the deadline will be extended.
further Case Management Conference is scheduled for April 16,
2020 in Courtroom E, 450 Golden Gate Ave., San Francisco, CA.
An updated Joint Case Management Conference Statement is due
April 9, 2020.
trial will begin on December 14, 2020, at 8:30 a.m., in
Courtroom E, 15th Floor, U.S. District Court, 450 Golden
Gate, San Francisco, California.
Court is expecting the length of the trial to not exceed 3
Pretrial Conference shall be held on November 19, 2020, at
2:00 p.m., in Courtroom E, 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:
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.
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 forms, joint or separate.
and serve any objections to exhibits.
a joint simplified Statement of the Case to be read to the
jury during voir dire as part of the proposed jury
instructions. Unless the case is extremely ...