Cook v. Land O'Lakes, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California
DecidedJune 19, 2020
Docket1:20-cv-00553
StatusUnknown

This text of Cook v. Land O'Lakes, Inc. (Cook v. Land O'Lakes, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cook v. Land O'Lakes, Inc., (E.D. Cal. 2020).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JOHN COOK, Case No. 1: 20-cv-00553-NONE-SAB

10 Plaintiff, SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P 16)

11 Class Certification Deadline: Motion Filing: November 8, 2021 12 v. Discovery Deadlines: 13 Non-Expert Discovery: September 27, 2021 LAND O’LAKES, INC., 14 Defendant. 15

16 17 I. Date of Scheduling Conference 18 The Scheduling Conference in this matter was held on June 19, 2020. 19 II. Appearances of Counsel 20 Jonathan Lebe and Zachary Gershman telephonically appeared on behalf of Plaintiff John 21 Cook. 22 Joan Fife telephonically appeared on behalf of Defendant Land O’Lakes, Inc. 23 III. Consent to Magistrate Judge 24 All parties have not consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. As the parties 25 were advised in the Standing Order in Light of Ongoing Judicial Emergency in the Eastern 26 District of California (ECF No. 2-2), in the Fresno Division of the Eastern District, Judge Dale A. 27 Drozd is the district judge handling all cases assigned to himself and to those cases that are 28 1 currently unassigned to a district judge. Due to the enormous case load, it is unavoidable that 2 there are significant delays in deciding matters filed before the district judge. Pursuant to 28 3 U.S.C. § 636(c), to the parties who have not consented to conduct all further proceedings in this 4 case, including trial, before United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone, you should be 5 informed that because of the pressing workload of United States district judges and the priority of 6 criminal cases under the United States Constitution, you are encouraged to consider consenting to 7 magistrate judge jurisdiction in an effort to have your case adjudicated in a timely and cost 8 effective manner. 9 IV. Initial Disclosure under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) 10 The parties exchanged the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) prior to 11 the scheduling conference. 12 V. Amendments to Pleading 13 Plaintiff may seek to amend the pleadings to add additional class representatives. The 14 parties are advised that filing motions and/or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings 15 does not reflect on the propriety of the amendment or imply good cause to modify the existing 16 schedule, if necessary. All proposed amendments must (A) be supported by good cause pursuant 17 to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) if the amendment requires any modification to the existing schedule, see 18 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992), and (B) establish, 19 under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), that such an amendment is not (1) prejudicial to the opposing party, 20 (2) the product of undue delay, (3) proposed in bad faith, or (4) futile, see Foman v. Davis, 371 21 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 22 VI. Class Certification 23 Scheduling in this matter will be a phased with this first phase addressing class 24 certification. Any motions for class certification shall be filed on or before November 8, 2021. 25 VII. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Dates 26 The parties are ordered to complete all non-expert discovery on or before September 27, 27 2021. 28 The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party’s duty to timely supplement 1 disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced. 2 The parties are cautioned that the discovery/expert cut-off deadlines are the dates by 3 which all discovery must be completed. Absent good cause, discovery motions will not be heard 4 after the discovery deadlines. Moreover, absent good cause, the Court will only grant relief on a 5 discovery motion if the relief requested requires the parties to act before the expiration of the 6 relevant discovery deadline. In other words, discovery requests and deposition notices must be 7 served sufficiently in advance of the discovery deadlines to permit time for a response, time to 8 meet and confer, time to prepare, file and hear a motion to compel and time to obtain relief on a 9 motion to compel. Counsel are expected to take these contingencies into account when proposing 10 discovery deadlines. Compliance with these discovery cutoffs requires motions to compel be 11 filed and heard sufficiently in advance of the discovery cutoff so that the Court may grant 12 effective relief within the allotted discovery time. A party’s failure to have a discovery dispute 13 heard sufficiently in advance of the discovery cutoff may result in denial of the motion as 14 untimely. 15 VIII. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule 16 Unless prior leave of Court is obtained at least seven (7) days before the filing date, all 17 moving and opposition briefs or legal memorandum in civil cases shall not exceed twenty-five 18 (25) pages. Reply briefs filed by moving parties shall not exceed ten (10) pages. Before 19 scheduling any motion, the parties must comply with all requirements set forth in Local Rule 230 20 and 251. 21 A. Non-Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions 22 As noted, all non-expert discovery, including motions to compel, shall be completed no 23 later than September 27, 2021. Compliance with these discovery cutoffs requires motions to 24 compel be filed and heard sufficiently in advance of the discovery cutoff so that the Court may 25 grant effective relief within the allotted discovery time. A party’s failure to have a discovery 26 dispute heard sufficiently in advance of the discovery cutoff may result in denial of the motion as 27 untimely. Non-dispositive motions are heard on Wednesdays at 10:00 a.m., before United States 28 Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone in Courtroom 9. 1 In scheduling any non-dispositive motion, the Magistrate Judge may grant Applications 2 for an Order Shortening Time pursuant to Local Rule 144(e). However, if counsel does not 3 obtain an Order Shortening Time, the Notice of Motion must comply with Local Rule 251. 4 Counsel may appear and argue non-dispositive motions by telephone, providing a written 5 request to so appear is made to the Magistrate Judge’s Courtroom Clerk no later than three (3) 6 court days before the noticed hearing date. In the event that more than one attorney requests to 7 appear by telephone, then it shall be the obligation of the moving party(ies) to arrange and 8 originate a conference call to the court. 9 Discovery Disputes: If a motion is brought under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, the parties must 10 prepare and file a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement (“Joint Statement”) as required by 11 Local Rule 251. The Joint Statement must be filed seven (7) calendar days before the scheduled 12 hearing date. Courtesy copies of all motion-related documents, declarations, and exhibits must be 13 delivered to the Clerk’s Office by 10:00 a.m. on the fourth court day prior to the scheduled 14 hearing date. Motions will be removed from the court’s hearing calendar if the Joint Statement is 15 not timely filed or if courtesy copies are not timely delivered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cook v. Land O'Lakes, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cook-v-land-olakes-inc-caed-2020.