Harris v. McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc. ( 2021 )

1 James R. Hawkins, Bar No. 192925 James@Jameshawkinsaplc.com 2 Christina M. Lucio, Bar No. 253677 Christina@Jameshawkinsaplc.com 3 JAMES HAWKINS APLC 9880 Research Drive, Suite 200 4 Irvine, California 92618 Telephone: (949) 387-7200/Facsimile: (949) 387-6676 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff KEVIN HARRIS, 6 on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated 7 8 Tanja L. Darrow, Bar No. 175502 tdarrow@littler.com 9 LITTLER MENDELSON P.C. 633 West 5th Street, 63rd Floor 10 Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 443.4300/Facsimile: (213) 443.4299 11 Simerdip Khangura, Bar No. 272525 12 skhangura@littler.com Nathaniel H. Jenkins, Bar No. 312067 13 njenkins@littler.com LITTLER MENDELSON P.C. 14 500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2000 Sacramento, California 95814 15 Telephone: (916) 830.7200/Facsimile: (916) 561.0828 16 Attorneys for Defendant MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL INC. 17 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 19 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 20 KEVIN HARRIS, individually and on behalf of Case No. 2:20-CV-01321-JAM-AC 21 himself and all others similarly situated, JOINT STIPULATION TO MODIFY 22 THE INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; Plaintiff, ORDER 23 v. 24 Trial Date: June 6, 2022 MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL Complaint Filed: April 3, 2020 25 INC., a Virginia Corporation; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 26 Defendant. 27 28 1 Plaintiff KEVIN HARRIS (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant MCKESSON MEDICAL- 2 SURGICAL INC. (“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel 3 of record, hereby agree and respectfully stipulate as follows: 4 WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on April 3, 2020 in Placer County Superior 5 Court, and Defendant timely removed this matter to this Court on July 1, 2020. 6 WHEREAS, on August 24, 2020, the Parties filed their Joint Report of their Rule 26(f) 7 Conference and Proposed Discovery Plan (Dkt. 3), which included proposed deadlines for Plaintiff to 8 file a motion for class certification, and for Defendant to oppose such a motion; 9 WHEREAS, on August 25, 2020, this Court issued its Initial Scheduling Order (Dkt. 10 4), which set forth the following deadlines: 11  Expert Witness Disclosures by November 19, 2021 12  Rebuttal Expert Disclosures by December 3, 2021 13  Discovery to be completed by January 14, 2022 14  Dispositive Motions filed by February 15, 2022 15  Dispositive Motion hearing on March 15, 2022 at 1:30pm 16  Final Pre-Trial Conference on April 29, 2022 at 10:00am 17  Jury Trial on June 6, 2022 18 However, the Court’s Initial Scheduling Order did not include any deadlines for Class 19 Certification/De-Certification Motions, nor did it include deadlines for expert disclosures relating to 20 Class Certification as requested in the Parties’ Joint Report (Dkt. 3). 21 WHEREAS, on August 31, 2020, Defendant filed its Objections to the Initial 22 Scheduling Order (Dkt. 5), requesting that this Court set forth deadlines for Class Certification/De- 23 Certification as requested in the Parties’ Joint Report. 24 WHEREAS, Defendant’s Objections to the Initial Scheduling Order remained 25 pending, but the Parties’ thereafter propounded and responded to written discovery requests, and met 26 and conferred to resolve alleged deficiencies in the discovery responses, including serving amended 27 discovery responses, as well as engaging in efforts to resolve a discovery dispute relating to the scope 28 1 of the alleged putative Class. 2 WHEREAS, the Parties could not resolve their discovery dispute relating to the scope 3 of the putative Class, and held an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”) before Magistrate Judge 4 Claire on April 8, 2021. Magistrate Judge Claire determined that Plaintiff was entitled to conduct 5 discovery based on a broader scope of the Class. 6 WHEREAS, during the IDC, Defendant’s counsel raised to Magistrate Judge Claire 7 the fact that Defendant’s Objections to the Initial Scheduling Order remained pending, to which 8 Magistrate Judge Claire advised the Parties to file a stipulation to Modify the Scheduling Order to 9 incorporate the deadlines set forth in the Parties’ initial Joint Report. 10 WHEREAS, since the IDC, the Parties have engaged in further discovery and 11 depositions related to a broader scope of the putative Class, and have since met and conferred and 12 agree that Plaintiff still intends to move for Class Certification, and Defendant intends to oppose and/or 13 move for Class De-Certification, and that both Parties will need more time to conduct further discovery 14 and/or prepare a dispositive motion after the Court rules on Class Certification. 15 WHEREAS, good cause exists to modify the Court’s scheduling Order as follows: 16 The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of 17 litigation…” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and 18 internal quotation marks omitted). “A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the 19 judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); see e.g. Spiller v. Ella Smithers Geriatric Ctr., 919 F.2d 20 339, 343 (5th Cir. 1990) (court impliedly granted motion to modify scheduling order by allowing 21 summary judgment motion after pretrial motion cut-off date). 22 To establish “good cause,” parties seeking modification of a scheduling order must 23 generally show that, even with the exercise of due diligence, they cannot meet the order’s timetable. 24 Johnson, supra, 975 F.2d at 609; see e.g., Hood v. Hartford Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 567 F.Supp.2d 1221, 25 1224 (E.D. Cal. 2008) (granting request for modification that was promptly made when it became 26 apparent that compliance with the scheduling order was not possible). In determining “good cause,” 27 courts also consider the importance of the requested modification, the potential prejudice in allowing 28 1 the modification, and, conversely, whether denial of the requested modification would result in 2 prejudice. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. City of El Paso, 346 F.3d 541, 546 (5th Cir. 2003) (involving 3 amendment of pleadings). 4 Here, good cause exists for a modification of the Court’s scheduling order given the 5 Parties’ inability to complete necessary discovery within the Scheduling Order’s timetable, and the 6 lack of Class Certification Motion deadlines and post-Certification discovery deadlines. 7 THEREFORE, upon good cause shown, the Parties stipulate to continue and/or 8 modify the Scheduling Order as follows: 9  Last Day to Make Expert Witness Disclosures: 2/21/22 10  Last Day to Make Rebuttal Expert Disclosures: 3/21/22 11  Last Day to Complete Discovery Related to Class Certification (except expert 12 discovery): 3/11/22 13  Last Day to Complete Expert Discovery Related to Class Certification: 4/20/22 14  Last Day to Move for/against Class Certification: 4/5/22 15  Opposition to Class Certification Motion(s) by: 4/19/22 16  Repl(ies) to Class Certification Motion(s) by: 4/26/22 17  Hearing on Class Certification Motion(s) on: 5/3/22 18  [Assuming Certification Motion is decided on 5/3/22] Last Day to Complete 19 Remaining Discovery or file any Motion re Discovery: 8/19/22 20  Dispositive Motions and/or Motion to De-Certify Class filed by: 10/4/22 21  Dispositive Motion or Motion to De-Certify Class hearing: 11/15/22 22  Final Pre-Trial Conference: 1/27/23 23  Jury Trial: 3/13/23 24 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 25 26 27 28 1 Dated: November 4, 2021 JAMES HAWKINS APLC 2 3 /s/ Christina Lucio (as authorized on 11/4/21) JAMES R. HAWKINS 4 CHRISTINA M. LUCIO Attorney for Plaintiff 5 KEVIN HARRIS 6 7 Dated: November 4, 2021 LITTLER MENDELSON P.C. 8 9 /s/ Nathaniel H. Jenkins 10 TANJA L. DARROW SIMERDIP KHANGURA 11 NATHANIEL H. JENKINS Attorneys for Defendant 12 MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL INC. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 ORDER 2 Upon good cause shown, the Court Orders the Scheduling Order to be modified as 3 follows: 4 5  Last Day to Make Expert Witness Disclosures: 2/21/22 6  Last Day to Make Rebuttal Expert Disclosures: 3/21/22 7  Last Day to Complete Discovery Related to Class Certification (except expert 8 discovery): 3/11/22 9  Last Day to Complete Expert Discovery Related to Class Certification: 4/20/22 10  Last Day to Move for/against Class Certification: 4/5/22 11  Opposition to Class Certification Motion(s) by: 4/19/22 12  Repl(ies) to Class Certification Motion(s) by: 4/26/22 13  Hearing on Class Certification Motion(s) on: 5/3/22 14  [Assuming Certification Motion is decided on 5/3/22] Last Day to Complete 15 Remaining Discovery or file any Motion re Discovery: 8/19/22 16  Dispositive Motions and/or Motion to De-Certify Class filed by: 10/4/22 17  Dispositive Motion or Motion to De-Certify Class hearing: 11/15/22 at 1:30 18 PM 19  Final Pre-Trial Conference: 1/27/23 at 10:00 AM 20  Jury Trial: 3/13/23 at 9:00 AM 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: November 4, 2021 /s/ John A. Mendez 24 THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 26 27 28