Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

SYKES v. SHEA, 2:16-cv-02851-WBS-GGH. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170525916 Visitors: 2
Filed: May 24, 2017
Latest Update: May 24, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF GREGORY G. HOLLOWS , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs Tyeshina Sykes and Jae'Lonia Sykes, and Defendants Donald James Shea and Kunkle Truck Lines, Inc., by and through their respective counsel, hereby agree and stipulate as follows: 1. On April 7, 2017, the Court issued a Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order, ordering the parties to disclose experts and produce expert reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) by
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF

Plaintiffs Tyeshina Sykes and Jae'Lonia Sykes, and Defendants Donald James Shea and Kunkle Truck Lines, Inc., by and through their respective counsel, hereby agree and stipulate as follows:

1. On April 7, 2017, the Court issued a Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order, ordering the parties to disclose experts and produce expert reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) by no later than June 9, 2017, and rebuttal reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) on or before July 7, 2017. The Court also left discovery open until August 2, 2017. The Court also set the Final Pretrial Conference for December 4, 2017, and the Trial for February 6, 2017.

2. During the entire pendency of this lawsuit, the Parties have worked amicably and diligently in an effort to complete discovery. The Parties are continuing to do so.

3. The Parties agree that given the nature of the disputes in this particular case, it would be appropriate to continue the deadlines associated with expert discovery.

4. The Parties agree that the deadline to disclose experts and produce expert reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) should occur no later than August 17, 2017, and rebuttal reports should be served in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) on or before September 15, 2017.

5. The Parties agree that the deadline to conduct depositions of experts should be extended to October 13, 2017.

6. The Parties agree that expert discovery shall be completed not later than October 31, 2017. The word "completed" shall have the same meaning as outlined in the Court's April 7, 2017 Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order.

7. The Parties agree that expert discovery/motions relating to experts shall be completed not later than October 31, 2017.

8. No other pending dates in this matter need to be moved at this time.

THEREFORE THE PARTIES AGREE AND STIPULATE to continue the deadline to disclose experts and produce expert reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) by no later than August 17, 2017, and rebuttal reports on or before September 15, 2017. The parties also agree that the deadline to conduct depositions of experts will be extended to October 13, 2017. The deadline to complete expert discovery should be October 31, 2017. All other dates remain as currently calendared.

The parties herein agree this stipulation may be signed in counterpart.

ORDER

The Court having read the foregoing Stipulation and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline to disclose experts and produce expert reports in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) shall occur no later than August 17, 2017, and rebuttal reports shall be served in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) on or before September 15, 2017. The deadline to conduct depositions of experts will be extended to October 13, 2017. Expert discovery shall be completed not later than October 31, 2017. The word "completed" shall have the same meaning as outlined in the Court's April 7, 2017 Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order.

Additional Order

Under no circumstances shall the above extension of expert discovery affect the cutoff date for dispositive motions, nor shall it in any way affect the requirement of filing pretrial statements as previously ordered.

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