Rodriguez v. City of Bakersfield ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 OSVALDO RODRIGUEZ, Case No. 1:23-cv-01286-ADA-CDB 12 Plaintiff, SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16) 13 v. Discovery Deadlines: - Rule 26 Disclosures: December 11, 2023 14 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, et al. - Amended Pleadings: February 8, 2024 - Expert Disclosures: July 2, 2024 15 Defendants. - Rebuttal Disclosures: July 29, 2024 - Fact Discovery Cut-Off: June 10, 2024 16 - Expert Discovery Cut-Off: August 28, 2024 - Mid-Discovery Status Conference: April 15, 17 2024, at 9:30 a.m., in Bakersfield Federal Courthouse 510 19th Street, Bakersfield, CA 18 93301 19 Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: - Filing: September 17, 2024 20 - Hearing: On October 28, 2024, at 10:30 a.m., Bakersfield Federal Courthouse 21 Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 22 - Filing: December 4, 2024 - Hearing: On/before January 6, 2025, 23 1:30 p.m, in Robert E. Coyle Federal Courthouse, Fresno, Courtroom 1, 8th Floor 24 Pre-Trial Conference: May 29, 2025, at 1:30 25 p.m., in Fresno Federal Courthouse 26 Trial: July 14, 2025, at 8:30 a.m, in Fresno Federal Courthouse 27 28 1 On August 28, 2023, Plaintiff Osvaldo Rodriguez filed a complaint against the City of 2 Bakersfield, Steven Glenn, Trent Alexander, and Tyler Schleicher. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff raises the 3 following claims against Defendants: (1) violation of civil rights and conspiracy to violate civil rights, 4 (2) unreasonable force, (3) violation of free speech, and (4) Monell-failure to train. Id. 5 I. Date of Scheduling Conference 6 The parties convened via Zoom videoconference for a scheduling conference before 7 Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker on November 20, 2023. 8 II. Appearances of Counsel 9 Alexis Galindo appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. 10 Heather Cohen appeared on behalf of Defendants. 11 III. Magistrate Judge Consent: 12 Currently there is no joint consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction. 13 Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing 14 Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the adopted policy of the Fresno Division of the 15 Eastern District is to trail all civil cases. The parties are hereby notified that for a trial date set before a 16 District Judge, the parties will trail indefinitely behind any higher priority criminal or older civil case 17 set on the same date until a courtroom becomes available. The trial date will not be reset. 18 The Magistrate Judges’ availability is far more realistic and accommodating to parties than that 19 of the District Judges who carry the heaviest caseloads in the nation and who must prioritize criminal 20 and older civil cases over more recently filed civil cases. A Magistrate Judge may conduct trials, 21 including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, 22 and Local Rule 305. Any appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate Judge is taken directly to the 23 United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. 24 Therefore, the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to 25 conduct all further proceedings, including trial, and to file a consent/decline form (provided by the 26 Court at the inception of this case) indicating whether they will consent to the jurisdiction of the 27 Magistrate Judge. 28 1 IV. Pleading Amendment 2 Any motions to amend the pleadings must be filed by February 8 2024. The parties are 3 advised that filing a motion and/or stipulation requesting leave to amend the pleadings does not reflect 4 on the propriety of the amendment or imply good cause to modify the existing schedule, if necessary. 5 All proposed amendments must (A) be supported by good cause pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) if the 6 amendment requires any modification to the existing schedule, see Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 7 Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992), and (B) establish, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), that such an 8 amendment is not (1) prejudicial to the opposing party, (2) the product of undue delay, (3) proposed in 9 bad faith, or (4) futile, see Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 10 V. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date 11 The parties shall exchange the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) by no later 12 than December 11, 2023. 13 The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before June 14 10, 2024, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before August 28, 2024. 15 The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses1, in writing, on or before July 2, 2024, 16 and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before July 29, 2024. The written designation of retained and 17 non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A), (B), and (C) and shall 18 include all information required thereunder. Failure to designate experts in compliance with this order 19 may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other evidence offered through such experts that are 20 not disclosed pursuant to this order. 21 The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) and (5) shall apply to all discovery relating to experts 22 and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions 23 included in the designation. Failure to comply will result in the imposition of sanctions, which may 24 include striking the expert designation and preclusion of expert testimony. 25 26 27 28 1 In the event an expert will offer opinions related to an independent medical or mental health evaluation, the examination SHALL occur sufficiently in advance of the disclosure deadline so the 1 The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party’s duty to timely supplement 2 disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced. 3 A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for April 15, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. before 4 Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker. Counsel SHALL file a joint mid-discovery status conference 5 report no later than one week before the conference. Counsel also SHALL lodge the joint status report 6 via e-mail to CDBorders@caed.uscourts.gov. The joint status report SHALL outline the discovery 7 counsel have completed and that which needs to be completed as well as any impediments to 8 completing the discovery within the deadlines set forth in this order. Counsel SHALL discuss 9 settlement and certify in the joint status report (1) that they have met/conferred regarding settlement, 10 and (2) proposed dates for convening a settlement conference before a U.S. magistrate judge. 11 VI. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule 12 All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later 13 than September 17, 20242 and heard on or before October 28, 2024, at 10:30 a.m. Discovery motions 14 shall be set before Magistrate Judge Baker. For these hearings and at the direction of the Courtroom 15 Deputy Clerk, the Court may direct counsel to appear remotely (via Zoom). For hearings noticed to 16 occur in-person, the Court may permit counsel to appear remotely (via Zoom) provided the Courtroom 17 Deputy Clerk receives a written notice of the request to appear remotely no later than five court days 18 before the noticed hearing date. All other non-dispositive hearings SHALL be set before the United 19 States District Judge. 20 No motion to amend or stipulation to amend the case schedule will be entertained unless it is 21 filed at least one week before the first deadline the parties wish to extend. Likewise, no written 22 discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval Magistrate Judge Baker. A party with a 23 discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve by 24 agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the moving party promptly 25 shall seek a hearing with all involved parties and Magistrate Judge Baker. To schedule this hearing, the 26 27 28 2 Non-dispositive motions related to non-expert discovery SHALL be filed within a reasonable time of discovery of the dispute, but in no event later than 30 days after the expiration of the non- 1 parties are ordered to contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Susan Hall, at (661) 326-6620 or via email 2 at SHall@caed.uscourts.gov. At least three days before the conference, counsel SHALL file informal 3 letter briefs detailing their positions. The briefs may not exceed 7 pages, excluding exhibits. Counsel 4 must comply with Local Rule 251 with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied 5 without prejudice and dropped from the Court’s calendar. 6 All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than December 4, 2024, and heard no 7 later than January 6, 2025, in Courtroom 1 at 1:30 p.m. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall 8 comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rules 230 and 260. 9 VII. Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication 10 At least 21 days before filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for summary 11 adjudication, the parties are ORDERED to meet, in person or by telephone, to confer about the issues to 12 be raised in the motion. 13 The purpose of the meeting shall be to: 1) avoid filing motions for summary judgment where a 14 question of fact exists; 2) determine whether the respondent agrees that the motion has merit in whole 15 or in part; 3) discuss whether issues can be resolved without the necessity of briefing; 4) narrow the 16 issues for review by the court; 5) explore the possibility of settlement before the parties incur the 17 expense of briefing a motion; and 6) to develop a joint statement of undisputed facts. 18 The moving party SHALL initiate the meeting and SHALL provide a complete, proposed 19 statement of undisputed facts at least five days before the conference. The finalized joint statement of 20 undisputed facts SHALL include all facts that the parties agree, for purposes of the motion, may be 21 deemed true. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260, the moving party shall file the joint 22 statement of undisputed facts. 23 In the notice of motion, the moving party SHALL certify that the parties have met and 24 conferred as ordered above or set forth a statement of good cause for the failure to meet and confer. 25 Failure to comply may result in the motion being stricken. 26 VIII. Pre-Trial Conference Date 27 May 29, 2025, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 1, before the assigned United States District Judge. 28 1 The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pretrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2). The 2 parties are further directed to submit a digital copy of their pretrial statement in Word format, to the 3 assigned United States District Judge. 4 Counsels; attention is directed to Rules 281 and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the 5 Eastern District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the pre-trial conference. 6 The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules. In addition to the matters set forth in the 7 Local Rules the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include a Joint Statement of the case to be used by the 8 Court to explain the nature of the case to the jury during voir dire. 9 IX. Trial Date 10 July 14, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 1 before the assigned United States District Judge. 11 12 A. This is a jury trial. 13 B. Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 5-10 days 14 C. Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of 15 California, Rule 285. 16 X. Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other 17 Techniques to Shorten Trial 18 Not applicable at this time. 19 XI. Related Matters Pending 20 There are no pending related matters. 21 XII. Compliance with Federal Procedure 22 All counsel are expected to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23 and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep abreast of any 24 amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to efficiently 25 handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow both the Federal 26 Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of California. 27 28 1 || XIII. Effect of this Order 2 The foregoing order represents the best estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda mo: 3 || suitable to dispose of this case. The trial date reserved is specifically reserved for this case. If the 4 || parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met, counsel are order 5 || to notify the court immediately of that fact so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or | 6 || subsequent status conference. 7 The dates set in this Order are considered to be firm and will not be modified absent a 8 || showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. Stipulations 9 || extending the deadlines contained herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by 10 || affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached exhibits, which establish good cause 11 || for granting the relief requested. 12 Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions. 13 || IT IS SO ORDERED. ll Dated: _ November 20, 2023 | hr 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28