Levy v. City of Sacramento ( 2020 )

1 S USANA ALCALA WOOD, City Attorney (SBN 156366) KATHLEEN T. ROGAN, Senior Deputy City Attorney (SBN 186055) 2 KRogan@cityofsacramento.org CITY OF SACRAMENTO 3 915 I Street, Room 4010 Sacramento, CA 95814-2608 4 Telephone: (916) 808-5346 Facsimile: (916) 808-7455 5 Attorneys for the CITY OF SACRAMENTO 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BYRON H. LEVY, Case No.: 2:18-cv-02387-TLN-DB 12 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO TAKE 13 PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION, vs. DISCLOSE EXPERTS, and FILE 14 DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS CITY OF SACRAMENTO, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Pursuant to Rule 16, a party may seek to modify a scheduling order, including 18 modification of a discovery cut-off date “for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” (Fed. 19 R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4).) “good cause” exists when a scheduling deadline “cannot reasonably be 20 met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” (Schaffner v. Crown Equipment 21 Corporation, 2011 WL 6303408 at *2 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 2011) (citing Johnson v. Mammoth 22 Recreation, Inc., 975 F 2d. 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). 23 The City filed its answer in this case on October 14, 2018. The case has been pending 24 only twenty months. There is currently no trial date. 25 On February 25, 2020, this court approved the parties’ stipulation seeking the 26 continuation of discovery cutoff, expert disclosure, and dispositive motion dates. (Docket 27 number 10.) The modified deadlines were necessary because conflicts with the parties’ 1 The current deadlines are: 2 1) Plaintiff’s deposition be completed not later than June 30, 2020; 3 2) Depositions of the City’s Persons Most Knowledgeable, previously noticed on 4 February 11, 2020, will be completed by July 15, 2020; 5 3) Expert disclosure will occur on August 17, 2020; 6 4) Dispositive motions will be filed by November 2, 2020. 7 On March 19, 2020, the Sacramento County Health Department issued an order requiring 8 all non-essential workers to remain at home. That order was extended on April 7, May 1, May 9 26, and June 12, 2020. Consequently, both counsel have been working from home, as have 10 some of those who would be designated as person’s most knowledgeable. These circumstances 11 have prevented the parties from completing the remaining depositions. 12 For the foregoing reasons, the parties stipulate and respectfully request the court’s 13 consideration of the following modifications to the Rule 16 Scheduling order: 14 1) Plaintiff’s deposition be completed not later than January 30, 2021; 15 2) Depositions of the City’s Persons Most Knowledgeable, previously noticed on 16 February 11, 2020, will be completed by February 15, 2021; 17 3) Expert disclosure will occur on April 15, 2021; 18 4) Dispositive motions will be filed by July 2, 2021. 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 1 So Stipulated. 2 3 Dated: June 17, 2020 SUSANA ALCALA WOOD, City Attorney 4 5 6 By: /s/ Kathleen T. Rogan KATHLEEN T. ROGAN 7 Senior Deputy City Attorney Attorneys for the 8 CITY OF SACRAMENTO 9 Dated: June 17, 2020 LAW OFFICES OF AKUDINOBI & IKONTE 10 11 By: /s/ Chijioke Ikonte 12 CHIJIOKE IKONTE Attorney for the Plaintiff 13 BYRON LEVY 14 ORDER 15 The court finds sufficient good cause to continue plaintiff’s deposition, expert disclosure 16 and the dispositive motion dates. The Rule 16 scheduling order is amended accordingly: 17 Plaintiff’s deposition shall be completed not later than January 30, 2021, 2) Depositions of 18 the City’s Persons Most Knowledgeable, previously noticed on February 11, 2020, will be 19 completed by February 15, 2021; 3) Expert disclosure shall occur on April 15, 2021; and 4) 20 Dispositive motions shall be filed not later than October 1, 2021. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 24 Dated: June 18, 2020 25 26 27