Leonhart v. C R Bard Inc ( 2020 )

1 Shawtina F. Lewis (SBN 259255) shawtina.lewis@nelsonmullins.com 2 NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 3 19191 South Vermont Avenue, Suite 900 Torrance, CA 90502 4 Telephone: 424.221.7400 Facsimile: 424.221.7499 5 Attorneys for Defendants 6 C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TOM LEONHART, Case No.: 1:20-cv-01677-DAD-BAM 11 Plaintiff, JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY 12 v. OF DISCOVERY AND ALL PRETRIAL DEADLINES & ORDER 13 C. R. BARD INC., and BARD PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INC., (Doc. No. 47.) 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and (d), Plaintiff in the above-titled 2 action and Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (collectively, “Bard”) 3 (Plaintiff and Bard are collectively referred to herein as “the Parties”), respectfully request that 4 this Court extend the temporary stay of discovery and all pretrial deadlines and continue the initial 5 Scheduling Conference in this case until March 2, 2021 while the Parties continue settlement 6 discussions. In support thereof, the Parties state as follows: 7 1. This case was originally filed in the State Court of Dallas County, Texas, by a Texas 8 resident serving as lead plaintiff, and joined multiple individual plaintiffs, including the instant 9 plaintiff. The case was subsequently removed by Bard to the United States District Court for the 10 Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. 11 2. On August 20, 2020, the Court issued an Order granting the lead plaintiff’s 12 Unopposed Motion to Sever and Transfer Venue of Out-of-State Plaintiff’s Cases, and the case 13 was transferred to this District and assigned to this Court. (Doc. 27.) 14 3. On September 15, 2020, this Court found good cause to grant the parties’ previous 15 motion to stay all discovery pretrial deadlines in this action and continue the initial scheduling 16 conference to December 9, 2020 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM). (Doc. 45.) The Parties 17 continue to engage in serious settlement discussions in an effort to reach a global resolution of an 18 entire inventory of cases, which consists of over 700 cases. Accordingly, the Parties jointly move 19 this Court for an order extending the staying of all discovery and pretrial deadlines and continuing 20 the initial Scheduling Conference in this case until March 2, 2021 to allow the Parties to continue 21 to engage in settlement discussions. This will further facilitate settlement discussions and prevent 22 unnecessary expenditures of the parties and judicial resources. 23 4. A district court has broad discretion over pretrial discovery rulings. See, e.g., 24 Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 598 (1998); accord Thermal Design, Inc. v. Am. Soc’y of 25 Heating, Refrigerating & Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 755 F.3d 832, 837 (7th Cir. 2014); 26 Burns v. EGS Fin. Care, Inc., No. 4:15-CV-06173-DGK, 2016 WL 7535365 at *1 (W.D. Mo. Apr. 27 12, 2016); see also Cook v. Kartridg Pak Co., 840 F.2d 602, 604 (8th Cir. 1988) (“A district court 28 1 justice.”); see also CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962) (district courts possess 2 “inherent power to control the disposition of the causes on its docket in a manner which will 3 promote economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants”). 4 5. Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(c) and 26(d), a court may limit the scope 5 of discovery or control its sequence. See Britton, 523 U.S. at 598. Although settlement 6 negotiations do not automatically excuse a party from its discovery obligations, the parties can 7 seek a stay prior to the cutoff date. See Sofo v. Pan-American Life Ins. Co., 13 F.3d 239, 242 (7th 8 Cir. 1994); Wichita Falls Office Assocs. V. Banc One Corp., 978 F.2d 915, 918 (5th Cir. 1993) 9 (finding that a “trial judge’s decision to curtail discovery is granted great deference,” and noting 10 that the discovery had been pushed back a number of times because of pending settlement 11 negotiations). 12 6. The Parties agree that the relief sought herein is necessary to handle the case in the 13 most economical fashion, yet allow sufficient time to schedule and complete discovery if 14 necessary, consistent with the scheduling obligations of counsel. The relief sought in this Motion 15 is not being requested for delay, but so that justice may be done. 16 WHEREFORE, The Parties jointly request that the stay of discovery and all pretrial 17 deadlines be extended and that the initial Scheduling Conference be continued until March 2, 2021 18 to allow the Parties to conduct ongoing settlement negotiations. 19 [Signatures on the following page] 20 // 21 // 22 // 23 // 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 1 DATED: November 24, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 2 NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 3 4 /s/ Shawtina F. Lewis Shawtina F. Lewis (SBN 259255) 5 19191 South Vermont Avenue, Suite 900 Torrance, CA 90502 6 Telephone: 424.221.7400 Facsimile: 424.221.7499 7 shawtina.lewis@nelsonmullins.com Attorney for Defendants 8 C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. 9 DATED: November 24, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 10 FEARS NACHAWATI LAW FIRM 11 12 /s/ Steven Schulte (as authorized on 11/24/2020) Steven Schulte (admitted pro hac vice) 13 5473 Blair Road Dallas, Texas 75231 14 T: (214) 890-0711/F: (214) 890-0712 schulte@fnlawfirm.com 15 16 Attorneys for Plaintiff 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 ORDER 2 Upon consideration of the Parties’ JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF 3 DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL DEADLINES, and for good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY 4 ORDERED that the Parties’ Motion is GRANTED. All discovery and all pretrial deadlines are 5 hereby stayed and extended until the Initial Scheduling Conference. The Initial Scheduling 6 Conference is continued to March 2, 2021, at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before 7 Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe to allow the Parties to conduct ongoing settlement 8 negotiations. The parties shall file a Joint Scheduling Report at least one (1) full week prior to the 9 Scheduling Conference. The parties shall appear at the Scheduling Conference with each party 10 connecting remotely either via Zoom video conference or Zoom telephone number. The parties 11 shall be provided with the Zoom ID and password by the Courtroom Deputy prior to the 12 conference. The Zoom ID number and password are confidential and are not to be shared. 13 Appropriate court attire required. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: December 1, 2020 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28