Corpuz v. Walmart, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California·Decided September 12, 2023·No. 3:22-cv-00901·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 EDISON CORPUZ, on behalf of himself Case No.: 3:22-cv-00901-RBM-AHG and all others similarly situated, 13 ORDER GRANTING JOINT Plaintiff, MOTION TO CONTINUE EARLY 14 NEUTRAL EVALUATION v. 15 CONFERENCE AND CASE WALMART, INC., MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 16

Defendant. 17 [ECF No. 16] 18 19 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Continue the Early Neutral 20 Evaluation (“ENE”) and Case Management Conference (“CMC”) currently scheduled for 21 September 18, 2023. ECF No. 16. 22 Parties seeking to continue an ENE must demonstrate good cause. ECF No. 15 at 6 23 (“An ENE may be rescheduled only upon a showing of good cause”); Chmb.R. at 2 (stating 24 that any request for continuance requires “[a] showing of good cause for the request”); see 25 FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court 26 may, for good cause, extend the time”). 27 “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard that has been construed broadly across 28 procedural and statutory contexts. Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 1 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to 2 amend the scheduling order and the reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth 3 Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). 4 Here, the parties represent to the Court that a third-party manufacturer is 5 indemnifying Defendant in this case, and Plaintiff intends to add this third-party 6 manufacturer as a defendant. ECF No. 16 at 2. The third-party manufacturer has indicated 7 to Defendant’s counsel that it needs more time to evaluate Plaintiff’s claims and formulate 8 a position on settlement. Id. at 2–3; ECF No. 16-1 at 2. Accordingly, to facilitate a better- 9 informed and more-productive ENE, the parties request that both the ENE and CMC be 10 continued to November 1, 2023. Id. 11 The Court finds good cause to GRANT IN PART1 the Motion. The Court 12 ORDERS the following: 13 1. The ENE and CMC originally rescheduled for September 18, 2023, are hereby 14 CONTINUED to November 13, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. before Magistrate Judge 15 Allison H. Goddard. In accordance with the Local Rules, the Court requires attendance of 16 all parties, party representatives, including claims adjusters for insured defendants, and the 17 primary attorney(s) responsible for the litigation via videoconference. CivLR 16.1(c)(1). 18 2. Purpose of the Conference: The purpose of the ENE is to permit an informal 19 discussion between the attorneys and the settlement judge of every aspect of the lawsuit in 20 an effort to achieve an early resolution of the case. All conference discussions will be 21 informal, off the record, and confidential. 22 3. Full Settlement Authority Required: A party or party representative with 23 full and complete authority to enter into a binding settlement must be present via 24 videoconference. Full authority to settle means that a person must be authorized to fully 25

26 27 1 The parties requested that the continued ENE and CMC take place on November 1, 2023. ECF No. 16 at 2. Though the Court appreciates that the parties worked together to find a 28 1 explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement terms acceptable to 2 the parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 3 1989). The person needs to have “unfettered discretion and authority” to change the 4 settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Int’l, Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485–86 (D. 5 Ariz. 2003). Limited or sum certain authority is not adequate. Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, 6 Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 595–97 (8th Cir. 2001). A person who needs to call another person 7 who is not present on the videoconference before agreeing to any settlement does not 8 have full authority. 9 4. Confidential ENE Statements Required: No later than November 6, 2023, 10 the parties shall submit confidential statements of five (5) pages or less directly to the 11 chambers of Magistrate Judge Goddard outlining the nature of the case, the claims, and the 12 defenses. These statements shall not be filed or served on opposing counsel. They shall 13 be lodged via email at efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov. The ENE statement is limited to 14 five (5) pages or less, and up to five (5) pages of exhibits or declarations. Each party’s 15 ENE statement must outline: 16 A. the nature of the case and the claims, 17 B. position on liability or defense, 18 C. position regarding settlement of the case with a specific2 19 demand/offer for settlement,3 and 20 D. any previous settlement negotiations or mediation efforts. 21 5. Case Management Conference: In the event the case does not settle at the 22 ENE, the Court will immediately thereafter hold a Case Management Conference (“CMC”) 23

24 25 2 A general statement, such as that a party “will negotiate in good faith,” is a not a specific demand or offer. 26 27 3 If a specific demand or offer cannot be made at the time the ENE statement is submitted, then the reasons as to why a demand or offer cannot be made must be stated. Further, the 28 1 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b). Appearance of the parties at the CMC is not required. 2 The Court orders the following to occur before the CMC: 3 A. The parties must meet and confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) no 4 later than October 16, 2023. 5 B. The parties must file a Joint Case Management Statement by 6 November 2, 2023. The Joint Case Management Statement must 7 address all points in the “Joint Case Management Statement 8 Requirements for Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard,” which can 9 be found on the court website at: 10 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/Judges/goddard/docs/Goddard%20Join 11 t%20Case%20Management%20Statement%20Rules.pdf. 12 C. Initial disclosures pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1)(A-D) must occur by 13 October 30, 2023. 14 6. Appearances via Videoconference Required: All named parties, party 15 representatives, including claims adjusters for insured defendants, as well as principal 16 attorney(s) responsible for the litigation must attend the ENE via videoconference. All who 17 attend the ENE must be legally and factually prepared to discuss and resolve the case. 18 Counsel appearing without their clients (whether or not counsel has been given settlement 19 authority) will be subject to immediate imposition of sanctions. To facilitate the 20 videoconference ENE, the Court hereby orders as follows: 21 A. The Court will use its official Zoom video conferencing account to hold 22 the ENE. If you are unfamiliar with Zoom: Zoom is available on 23 computers through a download on the Zoom website 24 (https://zoom.us/meetings) or on mobile devices through the 25 installation of a free app.4 Joining a Zoom conference does not require 26

27 4 If possible, participants are encouraged to use laptops or desktop computers for the 28 1 creating a Zoom account, but it does require downloading the .exe file 2 (if using a computer) or the app (if using a mobile device). Participants 3 are encouraged to create an account, install Zoom and familiarize 4 themselves with Zoom in advance of the ENE.5 There is a cost-free 5 option for creating a Zoom account. 6 B.

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

Corpuz v. Walmart, Inc., (S.D. Cal. 2023).

Corpuz v. Walmart, Inc. (Corpuz v. Walmart, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related