SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16)

JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.

I. Date of Scheduling Conference

October 5, 2018.

II. Appearances of Counsel

Andrea Marcus appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

Darren Bogie appeared on behalf of Defendant.

III. Pleading Amendment Deadline

Any requested pleading amendments are ordered to be filed, either through a stipulation or motion to amend, no later than November 30, 2018.

IV. Administrative Record

In lieu of initial disclosures, the plaintiff SHALL lodge the administrative record no later than November 30, 2018. The plaintiff SHALL also provide a searchable, electronic copy of the record to the chambers of Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill.

V. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date

The parties are ordered to complete all discovery on or before June 7, 2019.

Plaintiff is directed to disclose all expert witnesses,2 in writing, on or before May 29, 2019. Defendant is directed to disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, on or before April 12, 2019. Plaintiff shall disclose any rebuttal experts no later than May 10, 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.

The 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 testimony.

The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party's duty to timely supplement disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced.

A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for February 25, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, U.S. Magistrate Judge, located at 510 19th Street, Bakersfield, California. Counsel SHALL file a joint mid-discovery status conference report one week before the conference. Counsel also SHALL lodge the status report via e-mail to JLTorders@caed.uscourts.gov. The joint statement SHALL outline the discovery counsel have completed and that which needs to be completed as well as any impediments to completing the discovery within the deadlines set forth in this order. Counsel may appear via teleconference by dialing (888) 557-8511 and entering Access Code 1652736, provided the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Deputy Clerk receives a written notice of the intent to appear telephonically no later than five court days before the noticed hearing date.

VI. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule

All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later than June 28, 2019 and heard on or before July 26, 2019. Non-dispositive motions are heard before the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston, United States Magistrate Judge at the United States Courthouse in Bakersfield, California.

No motion to amend or stipulation to amend the case schedule will be entertained unless it is filed at least one week before the first deadline the parties wish to extend. Likewise, no written discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the assigned Magistrate Judge. A party with a discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve by agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the moving party promptly shall seek a telephonic hearing with all involved parties and the Magistrate Judge. It shall be the obligation of the moving party to arrange and originate the conference call to the court. To schedule this telephonic hearing, the parties are ordered to contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Susan Hall, at (661) 326-6620 or via email at SHall@caed.uscourts.gov. Counsel must comply with Local Rule 251 with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied without prejudice and dropped from the Court's calendar.

Counsel may appear and argue non-dispositive motions via teleconference by dialing (888) 557-8511 and entering Access Code 1652736, provided the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Deputy Clerk receives a written notice of the intent to appear telephonically no later than five court days before the noticed hearing date.

The briefing on the IDEA appeal and any other dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than August 16, 2019. The opposition SHALL be filed no later than September 6, 2019 and the optional reply may be filed no later than September 30, 2019. The hearing is set in Courtroom 4 at 8:30 a.m. before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United States District Court Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rules 230 and 260.

VII. Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication

At least 21 days before filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for summary adjudication, the parties are ORDERED to meet, in person or by telephone, to confer about the issues to be raised in the motion.

The purpose of the meeting shall be to: 1) avoid filing motions for summary judgment where a question of fact exists; 2) determine whether the respondent agrees that the motion has merit in whole or in part; 3) discuss whether issues can be resolved without the necessity of briefing; 4) narrow the issues for review by the court; 5) explore the possibility of settlement before the parties incur the expense of briefing a motion; and 6) to develop a joint statement of undisputed facts.

The moving party SHALL initiate the meeting and SHALL provide a complete, proposed statement of undisputed facts at least five days before the conference. The finalized joint statement of undisputed facts SHALL include all facts that the parties agree, for purposes of the motion, may be deemed true. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260, the moving party shall file the joint statement of undisputed facts.

In the notice of motion, the moving party SHALL certify that the parties have met and conferred as ordered above, or set forth a statement of good cause for the failure to meet and confer. Failure to comply may result in the motion being stricken.

VIII. Pretrial Conference3

January 8, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before Judge O'Neill.

The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pretrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2). The parties are further directed to submit a digital copy of their pretrial statement in Word format, directly to Judge O'Neill's chambers, by email at LJOorders@caed.uscourts.gov.

Counsels' attention is directed to Rules 281 and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the pre-trial conference. The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules.

IX. Trial Date

March 3, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before the Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill, United StatesDistrictCourtJudge.

A. This is a jury trial.

B. Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 4 days.

C. Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California, Rule 285.

X. Settlement Conference

The parties may seek a settlement conference by filing a joint request and proposing dates for the conference. They SHALL certify in the request that they believe that a settlement conference is likely to be fruitful.

Notwithstanding the requirements of Local Rule 270(b), the settlement conference will be conducted by Magistrate Judge Thurston. The Court deems the deviation from the Local Rule to be appropriate and in the interests of the parties and justice and sound case management based upon the location of the parties. If any party prefers that the settlement conference be conducted by a judicial officer who is not assigned to the case, they SHALL indicate this preference in their joint request for a settlement conference. In this event, they should file the joint request at least 60 in advance of the proposed dates to allow sufficient time for another judicial officer to be assigned to handle the conference.

XI. Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other Techniques to Shorten Trial

Not applicable at this time.

XII. Related Matters Pending

There are no pending related matters.

XIII. Compliance with Federal Procedure

All counsel are expected to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep abreast of any amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to efficiently handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California.

XIV. Effect of this Order

The foregoing order represents the best estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most suitable to dispose of this case. The trial date selected is specifically reserved for this case. If the parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met, counsel are ordered to notify the court immediately of that fact so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by subsequent status conference.

The dates set in this order are firm and will not be modified absent a showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. Stipulations extending the deadlines will not be considered unless they are accompanied by affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached exhibits, that establish good cause for granting the relief requested.

Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.