1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 ESTATE OF WILLIAM HAYDEN Case No.: 3:23-cv-00785-DMS-AHG SCHUCK, et al., 13 ORDER: Plaintiffs, 14 (1) GRANTING IN PART JOINT v. 15 MOTION TO MODIFY THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al., SCHEDULING ORDER, and 16
Defendants. 17 (2) ISSUING SECOND AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 18
19 [ECF No. 71] 20 21 22 Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to modify the scheduling order. ECF 23 No. 71. The parties seek an order from the Court extending certain case management 24 deadlines by approximately two months. Id. 25 Parties seeking to continue deadlines in the scheduling order must demonstrate good 26 cause. FED. R. CIV. P. 16(b)(4) (“A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with 27 the judge’s consent”); ECF No. 57 at 7 (Amended Scheduling Order, stating that “[t]he 28 dates [] set forth herein will not be modified except for good cause shown”); see also 1 Chmb.R. at 2 (stating that any request for continuance requires “[a] showing of good cause 2 for the request”). 3 “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard that has been construed broadly across 4 procedural and statutory contexts. Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 5 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to 6 amend the scheduling order and the reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth 7 Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (“[T]he focus of the inquiry is upon 8 the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification. . . . If that party was not diligent, the 9 inquiry should end.”) (internal citation omitted). Therefore, “a party demonstrates good 10 cause by acting diligently to meet the original deadlines set forth by the court.” Merck v. 11 Swift Transp. Co., No. CV-16-01103-PHX-ROS, 2018 WL 4492362, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 12 19, 2018). 13 Here, the parties have represented to the Court that, though they have been diligently 14 working together to complete discovery, they need more time. ECF No. 71 at 2–3. 15 Specifically, the parties explain that, “[w]ith the exception of one set of written 16 interrogatories, one set requests for admission and a set of requests for production, all 17 written discovery has been served and responded to, and the parties have conducted 16 18 depositions, including the depositions of both plaintiffs, seven deputies, six jail nurses, and 19 one Rule 30(b)(6) deposition. Nevertheless, the parties are planning at least 15 additional 20 depositions.” Id. at 2. Further, counsel for the County Defendants highlights his limited 21 availability before the current fact discovery cutoff of July 11, 2024. ECF No. 71-1 at 2. 22 Additionally, Plaintiffs seek to amend their complaint to substitute certain Doe Defendants, 23 which they assert may lead to needing additional discovery. ECF No. 71 at 3. As such, the 24 parties request a five-month extension of the deadline to amend the pleadings, and a two- 25 month extension of the fact discovery, expert discovery, and pretrial motion deadlines. Id. 26 at 4. 27 The Court appreciates that the parties are working together and concludes that the 28 parties have demonstrated diligence. Upon due consideration, the Court finds good cause 1 to GRANT IN PART the motion. The Court issues the following Second Amended 2 Scheduling Order: 3 1. Any motion to join other parties, to amend the pleadings, or to file additional 4 pleadings must be filed by August 9, 2024. 5 2. All fact discovery must be completed by all parties by September 16, 2024. 6 “Completed” means that all discovery requests governed by Rules 30-36 of the Federal 7 Rules of Civil Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be propounded 8 sufficiently in advance of the discovery cut-off date so that they may be completed by 9 that date, taking into account the time permitted in the Rules for service, notice, and 10 responses. If any discovery disputes arise, counsel must meet and confer promptly and 11 in good faith in compliance with Local Rule 26.1(a). A failure to comply in this regard 12 will result in a waiver of a party’s discovery issue. Absent an order of the court, no 13 stipulation continuing or altering this requirement will be recognized by the Court. 14 The Court expects counsel to make every effort to resolve all disputes without court 15 intervention through the meet-and-confer process. If the parties reach an impasse on any 16 discovery issue, the movant must email chambers at efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov no 17 later than 45 days after the date of service of the written discovery response that is in 18 dispute, seeking a telephonic conference with the Court to discuss the discovery dispute. 19 The email must include: (1) at least three proposed times mutually agreed upon by the 20 parties for the telephonic conference; (2) a neutral statement of the dispute; and (3) one 21 sentence describing (not arguing) each parties’ position. The movant must copy opposing 22 counsel on the email. No discovery motion may be filed until the Court has conducted its 23 pre-motion telephonic conference, unless the movant has obtained leave of Court. All 24
25 1 In their motion, the parties state that “[a]ll remaining dates, including the March 26, 2025 26 mandatory settlement conference, June 27, 2025 pre-trial conference and the August 4, 27 2025 trial date would remain as scheduled.” ECF No. 71 at 5. However, the dates requested by the parties do impact the remaining dates in the scheduling order and the Court has 28 1 parties are ordered to read and to fully comply with the Chambers Rules of 2 Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard, which can be found on the district court website 3 and at: 4 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/judges/goddard/docs/Goddard%20Civil%20Pretrial%20Pr 5 ocedures.pdf. 6 3. The parties must designate their respective experts in writing by 7 October 15, 2024.2 The parties must identify any person who may be used at trial to 8 present evidence pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Fed. R. Evid. This requirement 9 is not limited to retained experts. The date for exchange of rebuttal experts must be by 10 November 18, 2024. The written designations must include the name, address and 11 telephone number of the expert and a reasonable summary of the testimony the expert is 12 expected to provide. The list must also include the normal rates the expert charges for 13 deposition and trial testimony. 14 4. By December 16, 2024, each party must comply with the disclosure 15 provisions in Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and (C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This 16 disclosure requirement applies to all persons retained or specially employed to provide 17 expert testimony, or whose duties as an employee of the party regularly involve the giving 18 of expert testimony. Except as provided in the paragraph below, any party that fails 19 to make these disclosures will not, absent substantial justification, be permitted to use 20 evidence or testimony not disclosed at any hearing or at the time of trial. In addition, 21 the Court may impose sanctions as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c). 22 5. Any party must supplement its disclosure regarding contradictory or rebuttal 23 evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) by January 21, 2025.3 24
25 2 The Court notes that the parties requested a deadline of October 14, 2024. ECF No. 71 26 at 4.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 ESTATE OF WILLIAM HAYDEN Case No.: 3:23-cv-00785-DMS-AHG SCHUCK, et al., 13 ORDER: Plaintiffs, 14 (1) GRANTING IN PART JOINT v. 15 MOTION TO MODIFY THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al., SCHEDULING ORDER, and 16
Defendants. 17 (2) ISSUING SECOND AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 18
19 [ECF No. 71] 20 21 22 Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to modify the scheduling order. ECF 23 No. 71. The parties seek an order from the Court extending certain case management 24 deadlines by approximately two months. Id. 25 Parties seeking to continue deadlines in the scheduling order must demonstrate good 26 cause. FED. R. CIV. P. 16(b)(4) (“A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with 27 the judge’s consent”); ECF No. 57 at 7 (Amended Scheduling Order, stating that “[t]he 28 dates [] set forth herein will not be modified except for good cause shown”); see also 1 Chmb.R. at 2 (stating that any request for continuance requires “[a] showing of good cause 2 for the request”). 3 “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard that has been construed broadly across 4 procedural and statutory contexts. Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 5 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to 6 amend the scheduling order and the reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth 7 Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (“[T]he focus of the inquiry is upon 8 the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification. . . . If that party was not diligent, the 9 inquiry should end.”) (internal citation omitted). Therefore, “a party demonstrates good 10 cause by acting diligently to meet the original deadlines set forth by the court.” Merck v. 11 Swift Transp. Co., No. CV-16-01103-PHX-ROS, 2018 WL 4492362, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 12 19, 2018). 13 Here, the parties have represented to the Court that, though they have been diligently 14 working together to complete discovery, they need more time. ECF No. 71 at 2–3. 15 Specifically, the parties explain that, “[w]ith the exception of one set of written 16 interrogatories, one set requests for admission and a set of requests for production, all 17 written discovery has been served and responded to, and the parties have conducted 16 18 depositions, including the depositions of both plaintiffs, seven deputies, six jail nurses, and 19 one Rule 30(b)(6) deposition. Nevertheless, the parties are planning at least 15 additional 20 depositions.” Id. at 2. Further, counsel for the County Defendants highlights his limited 21 availability before the current fact discovery cutoff of July 11, 2024. ECF No. 71-1 at 2. 22 Additionally, Plaintiffs seek to amend their complaint to substitute certain Doe Defendants, 23 which they assert may lead to needing additional discovery. ECF No. 71 at 3. As such, the 24 parties request a five-month extension of the deadline to amend the pleadings, and a two- 25 month extension of the fact discovery, expert discovery, and pretrial motion deadlines. Id. 26 at 4. 27 The Court appreciates that the parties are working together and concludes that the 28 parties have demonstrated diligence. Upon due consideration, the Court finds good cause 1 to GRANT IN PART the motion. The Court issues the following Second Amended 2 Scheduling Order: 3 1. Any motion to join other parties, to amend the pleadings, or to file additional 4 pleadings must be filed by August 9, 2024. 5 2. All fact discovery must be completed by all parties by September 16, 2024. 6 “Completed” means that all discovery requests governed by Rules 30-36 of the Federal 7 Rules of Civil Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be propounded 8 sufficiently in advance of the discovery cut-off date so that they may be completed by 9 that date, taking into account the time permitted in the Rules for service, notice, and 10 responses. If any discovery disputes arise, counsel must meet and confer promptly and 11 in good faith in compliance with Local Rule 26.1(a). A failure to comply in this regard 12 will result in a waiver of a party’s discovery issue. Absent an order of the court, no 13 stipulation continuing or altering this requirement will be recognized by the Court. 14 The Court expects counsel to make every effort to resolve all disputes without court 15 intervention through the meet-and-confer process. If the parties reach an impasse on any 16 discovery issue, the movant must email chambers at efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov no 17 later than 45 days after the date of service of the written discovery response that is in 18 dispute, seeking a telephonic conference with the Court to discuss the discovery dispute. 19 The email must include: (1) at least three proposed times mutually agreed upon by the 20 parties for the telephonic conference; (2) a neutral statement of the dispute; and (3) one 21 sentence describing (not arguing) each parties’ position. The movant must copy opposing 22 counsel on the email. No discovery motion may be filed until the Court has conducted its 23 pre-motion telephonic conference, unless the movant has obtained leave of Court. All 24
25 1 In their motion, the parties state that “[a]ll remaining dates, including the March 26, 2025 26 mandatory settlement conference, June 27, 2025 pre-trial conference and the August 4, 27 2025 trial date would remain as scheduled.” ECF No. 71 at 5. However, the dates requested by the parties do impact the remaining dates in the scheduling order and the Court has 28 1 parties are ordered to read and to fully comply with the Chambers Rules of 2 Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard, which can be found on the district court website 3 and at: 4 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/judges/goddard/docs/Goddard%20Civil%20Pretrial%20Pr 5 ocedures.pdf. 6 3. The parties must designate their respective experts in writing by 7 October 15, 2024.2 The parties must identify any person who may be used at trial to 8 present evidence pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Fed. R. Evid. This requirement 9 is not limited to retained experts. The date for exchange of rebuttal experts must be by 10 November 18, 2024. The written designations must include the name, address and 11 telephone number of the expert and a reasonable summary of the testimony the expert is 12 expected to provide. The list must also include the normal rates the expert charges for 13 deposition and trial testimony. 14 4. By December 16, 2024, each party must comply with the disclosure 15 provisions in Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and (C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This 16 disclosure requirement applies to all persons retained or specially employed to provide 17 expert testimony, or whose duties as an employee of the party regularly involve the giving 18 of expert testimony. Except as provided in the paragraph below, any party that fails 19 to make these disclosures will not, absent substantial justification, be permitted to use 20 evidence or testimony not disclosed at any hearing or at the time of trial. In addition, 21 the Court may impose sanctions as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c). 22 5. Any party must supplement its disclosure regarding contradictory or rebuttal 23 evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) by January 21, 2025.3 24
25 2 The Court notes that the parties requested a deadline of October 14, 2024. ECF No. 71 26 at 4. However, that date is a federal holiday. 27 3 The Court notes that the parties requested a deadline of January 20, 2025. ECF No. 71 28 1 6. All expert discovery must be completed by all parties by February 18, 2025. 2 The parties must comply with the same procedures set forth in the paragraph governing 3 fact discovery. Failure to comply with this section or any other discovery order of the court 4 may result in the sanctions provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, including a prohibition on 5 the introduction of experts or other designated matters in evidence. 6 7. All other pretrial motions must be filed by March 21, 2025. Counsel for the 7 moving party must obtain a motion hearing date from the law clerk of the judge who will 8 hear the motion. The period of time between the date you request a motion date and the 9 hearing date may vary from one district judge to another. Please plan accordingly. Failure 10 to make a timely request for a motion date may result in the motion not being heard. 11 Motions in limine are to be filed as directed in the Local Rules, or as otherwise set by the 12 district judge. 13 8. A Mandatory Settlement Conference will be conducted on May 23, 2025 at 14 9:30 a.m. in the chambers of Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. Plaintiff must serve 15 on Defendant a written settlement proposal, which must include a specific demand 16 amount, no later than May 1, 2025. The defendant must respond to the plaintiff in writing 17 with a specific offer amount prior to the Meet and Confer discussion. The parties should 18 not file or otherwise copy the Court on these exchanges. Rather, the parties must include 19 their written settlement proposals in their respective Settlement Conference Statements to 20 the Court. Counsel for the parties must meet and confer in person or by phone no later than 21 May 8, 2025. Each party must prepare a Settlement Conference Statement, which will be 22 served on opposing counsel and lodged with the Court no later than May 15, 2025. The 23 Statement must be lodged in .pdf format via email to efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov 24 (not filed). The substance of the Settlement Conference Statement must comply fully with 25 Judge Goddard’s Mandatory Settlement Conference Rules (located at 26
27 4 The Court notes that the parties requested a deadline of February 17, 2025. ECF No. 71 28 1 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/Judges/goddard/docs/Goddard%20Mandatory%20Settlem 2 ent%20Conference%20Rules.pdf). Each party may also prepare an optional Confidential 3 Settlement Letter for the Court’s review only, to be lodged with the Court no later than 4 May 15, 2025. The Letter must be lodged in .pdf format via email to 5 efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov (not filed). Should a party choose to prepare a Letter, 6 the substance of the Settlement Conference Letter must comply fully with Judge Goddard’s 7 Mandatory Settlement Conference Rules. All parties are ordered to read and to fully 8 comply with the Chambers Rules and Mandatory Settlement Conference Rules of 9 Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. 10 9. Counsel shall file their Memoranda of Contentions of Fact and Law and take 11 any other action required by Local Rule 16.1(f)(2) by July 18, 2025. 12 10. Counsel shall comply with the pre-trial disclosure requirements of Fed. R. 13 Civ. P. 26(a)(3) by July 18, 2025. Failure to comply with these disclosure requirements 14 could result in evidence preclusion or other sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37. 15 11. Counsel shall meet and take the action required by Local Rule 16.1(f)(4) by 16 July 25, 2025. At this meeting, counsel shall discuss and attempt to enter into stipulations 17 and agreements resulting in simplification of the triable issues. Counsel shall exchange 18 copies and/or display all exhibits other than those to be used for impeachment. The exhibits 19 shall be prepared in accordance with Local Rule 16.1(f)(4)(c). Counsel shall note any 20 objections they have to any other parties’ Pretrial Disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 26(a)(3). Counsel shall cooperate in the preparation of the proposed pretrial conference 22 order. 23 12. Counsel for plaintiff will be responsible for preparing the pretrial order and 24 arranging the meetings of counsel pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.1(f). By August 1, 2025, 25 plaintiff’s counsel must provide opposing counsel with the proposed pretrial order for 26 review and approval. Opposing counsel must communicate promptly with plaintiff’s 27 attorney concerning any objections to form or content of the pretrial order, and both parties 28 shall attempt promptly to resolve their differences, if any, concerning the order. 1 13. The Proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order, including objections to any 2 || other parties’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures shall be prepared, served and 3 ||lodged with the assigned district judge by August 8, 2025, and shall be in the form 4 || prescribed in and comply with Local Rule 16.1(f)(6). 5 14. The final Pretrial Conference is scheduled on the calendar of the Honorable 6 ||Dana M. Sabraw on August 15, 2025 at 10:30 a.m. The trial is scheduled to start on 7 September 15, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. 8 15. The parties must review the chambers’ rules for the assigned district judge 9 magistrate judge. 10 16. A post trial settlement conference before a magistrate judge may be held 11 || within 30 days of verdict in the case. 12 17. The dates and times set forth herein will not be modified except for good cause 13 || shown. 14 18. Briefs or memoranda in support of or in opposition to any pending motion 15 ||shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length without leave of a district court judge. 16 reply memorandum shall exceed ten (10) pages without leave of a district court judge. 17 || Briefs and memoranda exceeding ten (10) pages in length shall have a table of contents 18 || and a table of authorities cited. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 Dated: June 28, 2024 21 pice H. Xyvolarul Honorable Allison i. Goddard United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28