Hill v. Jetblue Airways Corporation ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ----oo0oo---- 11 12 ERICKA BOHNEL, an individual; NO. 2:18-cv-00081-WBS- ROSA MARTINEZ, an individual, DMC 13 Plaintiffs, 14 v. 15 JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION, ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’ 16 MOTION TO CONTINUE Defendant. TRIALS 17 18 19 20 21 MICHELLE HILL, an individual; NO. 2:17-cv-01604-WBS-DB ARIEL EPSTEIN POLLACK, an 22 individual, 23 Plaintiffs, 24 v. 25 JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION, 26 Defendant. 27 28 1 ----oo0oo---- 2 Plaintiffs assert personal injury claims against 3 JetBlue arising out of an August 2016 turbulence incident on 4 JetBlue Airways Flight 429 from Boston Logan International 5 Airport to Sacramento International Airport. (Hill Compl. (Hill 6 Docket No. 1); Bohnel Compl. (Bohnel Docket No. 1).) Liability 7 discovery in Bohnel et al v. Jetblue Airways Corporation (2:18- 8 cv-00081-WBS-DMC) has been consolidated with that in Hill, et al 9 v. Jetblue Airways Corporation (No. 2:17-cv-01604-WBS-DB). (See 10 Bohnel Docket No. 17; Hill Docket No. 26.) Both cases concern 11 the same August 2016 turbulence incident. Presently before the 12 court is plaintiffs’ Motion to Continue Trial Date. (See Bohnel 13 Docket No. 24; Hill Docket No. 30.) 14 Plaintiffs ask this court to shift the trial dates and 15 the discovery deadlines in Hill and Bohnel forward so that they 16 may have time to conduct discovery before trial.1 Defendant does 17 not object to the continuance of the trial dates in Hill and 18 Bohnel.2 (See Response to Pl.’s Mot. to Continue Trial at 2 19 1 The National Transportation Safety Board is currently 20 investigating the August 2016 turbulence incident that gave rise to plaintiffs’ alleged injuries. (See Luke Decl. Ex 1 (Hill 21 Docket No. 31-1).) As a result, JetBlue is subject to an 22 investigative hold by the Board and JetBlue’s ability to respond to plaintiffs’ discovery requests is circumscribed by federal 23 regulations. (See id.) Plaintiffs state that the investigative hold has hampered their ability to conduct discovery and placed 24 the parties in a “holding pattern.” (Mot. to Continue Trial Date at 5.) 25 2 Confusingly, JetBlue’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Trial Date indicates that it objects “to the 26 consolidation of the damages trial portion of all four 27 [p]laintiffs’ cases.” (See Response to Pl.’s Mot. to Continue Trial at 2 (Hill Docket No. 32; Bohnel Docket No. 26).) Given 28 that plaintiffs are moving to continue the trial dates in Hill 1 (Bohnel Docket No. 26; Hill Docket No. 32).) 2 In light of plaintiffs’ diligence in attempting to 3 conduct discovery in a timely manner, the need for a continuance, 4 the lack of objection to the continuance, and the potential 5 prejudice to plaintiffs if their motion is denied, the court will 6 grant plaintiffs’ Motion to Continue Trial. (Bohnel Docket No. 7 24; Hill Docket No. 30.) See United States v. 2.61 Acres of 8 Land, More or Less, Situated in Mariposa Cty., 791 F.2d 666, 671 9 (9th Cir. 1985)(discussing factors to be evaluated by courts 10 considering motions to continue trial). 11 Accordingly, the court modifies the scheduling orders 12 in Hill (Docket No. 26) and Bohnel (Docket No. 17) as follows: 13 Fact discovery completion December 30, 2019. 14 Expert witness disclosure June 8, 2020 15 Rebuttal witness disclosure July 6, 2020 16 Discovery completion deadline August 3, 2020 17 Dispositive motion deadline September 14, 2020 Final pretrial conference October 26, 2020 at 18 1:30 p.m. Hill Trial January 5, 2021 at 19 9:00 a.m. 20 Bohnell Trial January 20, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. 21 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to 22 Continue the Trial Date (Hill Docket No. 30; Bohnel Docket No. 23 24) is GRANTED and the dates and deadlines of the Status 24 (Pretrial Scheduling) Order (Bohnel Docket No. 17; Hill Docket 25 No. 26) are modified as described herein. 26 27 and Bohnel, and not to consolidate, the court will ignore JetBlue’s objections to the consolidation of the trials on the 28 damages issue. 1 | Dated: August 7, 2019 a hho A hh WILLIAM B. SHUBB 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3 4 5 6 , 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28