Nielson v. Harley-Davidson Motor Company Group, LLC, 4:18-cv-00013-DN-PK. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Utah
Number: infdco20190823f84
Visitors: 3
Filed: Aug. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 22, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES AND AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER PAUL KOHLER , Magistrate Judge . Based on the representations and arguments in the parties' briefing on Plaintiffs' Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure Deadline Until After Specific Fact Discovery Already Planned Has Been Completed ("Motion"), 1 Plaintiffs have established good cause for the extension of the deadlines for fact discovery (limited to Plaintiff Angela Nielson's ongoing medi
Summary: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES AND AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER PAUL KOHLER , Magistrate Judge . Based on the representations and arguments in the parties' briefing on Plaintiffs' Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure Deadline Until After Specific Fact Discovery Already Planned Has Been Completed ("Motion"), 1 Plaintiffs have established good cause for the extension of the deadlines for fact discovery (limited to Plaintiff Angela Nielson's ongoing medic..
More
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES AND AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER
PAUL KOHLER, Magistrate Judge.
Based on the representations and arguments in the parties' briefing on Plaintiffs' Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure Deadline Until After Specific Fact Discovery Already Planned Has Been Completed ("Motion"),1 Plaintiffs have established good cause for the extension of the deadlines for fact discovery (limited to Plaintiff Angela Nielson's ongoing medical issues and the taking of depositions of Defendants' corporate representatives) and expert discovery. Additionally, because of the extension of these deadlines, it is necessary that other deadlines in the Scheduling Order2 be amended. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion3 is GRANTED. The Scheduling Order4 is amended as follows:
1. FACT DISCOVERY DATE
a. Deadline for Fact Discovery (limited to Plaintiff 09/11/2019
Angela Nielson's ongoing medical issues and the
taking of depositions of Defendants' corporate
representatives)
2. RULE 26(a)(2) EXPERT DISCLOSURES & DATE
REPORTS
Disclosures (subject and identity of experts)
a. Part(ies) bearing burden of proof: 09/11/2019
b. Counter disclosures: 10/11/2019
Reports
a. Part(ies) bearing burden of proof: 09/11/2019
b. Counter reports: 10/11/2019
3. OTHER DEADLINES DATE
a. Last day for expert discovery: 12/11/2019
b. Deadline for filing dispositive or potentially dispositive 01/13/2020
motions:
c. Deadline for filing partial or complete motions to 01/13/2020
exclude expert testimony:
4. TRIAL AND PREPARATION FOR TRIAL TIME DATE
a. Rule 26(a)(3) pretrial disclosures5
Plaintiffs: 04/17/2020
Defendant(s): 05/01/2020
b. Objections to Rule 26(a)(3) disclosures
(if different than 14 days provided in Rule)
c. Special Attorney Conference6 on or before: 05/15/2020
d. Settlement Conference7 on or before: 05/15/2020
e. Final Pretrial Conference: 9:00 a.m. 06/01/2020
f. Trial Length
Jury Trial 10 days 8:30a.m. 06/15/2020
FootNotes
1. Motion, docket no. 91, filed July 8, 2019; Defendants Sumitomo Rubber USA, LLC f/k/a Goodyear Dunlop Tires North America, Ltd. and The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure Deadline, docket no. 92, filed July 19, 2019; Harley-Davidson Motor company Group, LLC's Notice of Joinder to Defendants Sumitomo Rubber USA, LLC f/k/a Goodyear Dunlop Tires North America, Ltd. and The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure Deadline, docket no. 93, filed July 22, 2019; Reply to Defendants' Responses Regarding Extending Expert Disclosure Deadline Until After Specific Fact Discovery Already Planned Has Been Completed, docket no. 94, filed Aug. 9, 2019.
2. Docket no. 39, filed Aug. 10, 2018.
3. Docket no. 91, filed July 8, 2019.
4. Docket no. 39, filed Aug. 10, 2018.
5. The Parties must disclose and exchange any demonstrative exhibits or animations with the Rule 26(a)(3) disclosures.
6. The Special Attorneys Conference does not involve the court. During this conference, unless otherwise ordered by the court, counsel will agree, to the extent possible, on voir dire questions, jury instructions, and a pretrial order. They will discuss the presentation of the case, and they should schedule witnesses to avoid gaps and disruptions. The parties should mark exhibits in a way that does not result in duplication of documents. The pretrial order should include any special equipment or courtroom arrangement requirements.
7. The Settlement Conference does not involve the court unless the court enters a separate order. Counsel must ensure that a person or representative with full settlement authority or otherwise authorized to make decisions regarding settlement is available in person or by telephone during the Settlement Conference.
Source: Leagle
