Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Montelongo v. City of Modesto, 1:15-CV-01605-TLN-BAM. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190117e93 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jan. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 16, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES BARBARA A. McAULIFFE , Magistrate Judge . STIPULATION The Parties in the above-entitled action, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. On July 18, 2018, the Parties filed a stipulation requesting modifications to the pretrial schedule, including the close of fact and expert discovery, due to an unexpected and sudden leave of absence of lead counsel for Defendants, as well as
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES

STIPULATION

The Parties in the above-entitled action, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

1. On July 18, 2018, the Parties filed a stipulation requesting modifications to the pretrial schedule, including the close of fact and expert discovery, due to an unexpected and sudden leave of absence of lead counsel for Defendants, as well as the trial schedules of both Parties' counsel. On July 19, 2018, the Court issued an order granting the stipulated extensions. As a result, the close of fact discovery was set for December 15, 2018, the deadline for expert witness disclosures was set for February 7, 2019, and the deadline for the close of expert discovery was set for April 12, 2019. (ECF No. 64).

2. As directed by the Court, following a telephone discovery conference with the Court on August 27, 2018, the Parties filed a stipulation on September 4, 2018 to schedule Independent Medical Examinations ("IMEs") for Plaintiff Jesse Montelongo to take place while Mr. Montelongo was in custody, as well as to schedule when Defendants were to produce incident-related to documents following successful completion of the IMEs. (ECF No. Dkt. 75.) Because the timing of such IMEs would result in Plaintiffs receiving most of the discovery from Defendants in early November of 2018, Plaintiff included in the stipulation a request for the close of fact discovery to be extended from December 15, 2018 to February 1, 2019 to provide Plaintiffs with sufficient time to receive the discovery from Defendants and depose the one officer Defendant in the action, Officer Wallace. Defendants did not object to Plaintiffs' request. The Court signed and issued the proposed extension in its September 6, 2018 Order. (ECF No. 76.)

3. The IMEs were completed on schedule, and Defendants produced the incident-related discovery on November 14, on schedule as well under the Parties' stipulation and the Court's corresponding order. Due to scheduling conflicts and the intervening holiday period, however, the deposition of Officer Wallace could not be scheduled until the current close of the fact discovery period, and is set for February 1, 2019. The Parties are also still wrapping up third party discovery due to the Parties' efforts to meet the varying waiver requirement among third party health care providers concerning medical and mental health records for minors. Because such third party discovery has yet to be completed, the Parties believe that a modest one-month extension of the close of fact discovery is necessary.

4. Despite the prior requested change of the close of fact discovery from December 15, 2018 to February 1, 2019, the Parties did not request a corresponding extension of the expert disclosure deadlines and close of expert discovery, and therefore the deadline for expert disclosures remains scheduled for February 7, 2018 — just a week after the current close of fact discovery of February 1, 2019. Having only one week between the close of fact discovery and the deadline for expert disclosures is insufficient for the Parties to effectively complete expert disclosures in this case.

5. Given the present trial date in this matter of January 13, 2020, the Parties believe the pretrial schedule can accommodate a one-month extension of the fact discovery deadline — to allow the Parties time to wrap up all fact discovery in the case — and an extension of the expert disclosure deadlines, close of expert discovery, and ensuing dispositive motion deadlines — to maintain appropriate spacing between these events.

6. Accordingly, the Parties respectfully request that the following pretrial dates be rescheduled as follows:

Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline Fact discovery cut-off February 1, 2019 March 1, 2019 Expert witness disclosures February 7, 2019 April 5, 2019 Supplemental/rebuttal expert March 14, 2019 May 6, 2019 disclosures Close of expert discovery April 12, 2019 June 4, 2019 Last day to file dispositive July 18, 2019 September 5, 2019 motions Deadline for hearing of August 15, 2019 October 3, 2019 dispositive motions Trial January 13, 2020 Same

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Attestation of Concurrence In The Filing

The filer, David Mehretu, attests that all other signatories listed on whose behalf this filing is submitted concur in the filing's content and have authorized the filing.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, pursuant to the stipulation of the Parties, as modified below, which is recited above, and good cause in support thereof, the following pretrial dates are modified as below:

Event Prior Deadline New Deadline Fact discovery cut-off February 1, 2019 March 1, 2019 Expert witness disclosures February 7, 2019 April 5, 2019 Supplemental/rebuttal expert March 14, 2019 May 6, 2019 disclosures Close of expert discovery April 12, 2019 June 4, 2019 Last day to file dispositive July 18, 2019 August 2, 2019 motions Deadline for hearing of August 15, 2019 September 5, 2019 dispositive motions Trial January 13, 2020 Same

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the commencement date for Trial shall remain set for January 13, 2020. However, the Final Pretrial Conference, currently set for October 31, 2019, is continued to November 14, 2019, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley. The parties shall file their Joint Pretrial Conference Statement on or before November 7, 2019.

The parties are advised that further modification of the Scheduling Order will not be entertained by the Court absent a demonstrate and specific showing of good cause.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer