Ferro, M.D. v. Safeco Insurance Company of America

District Court, E.D. California·Decided April 29, 2024·No. 1:22-cv-00885·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THOMAS FERRO, M.D., Case No. 1:22-cv-00885-JLT-CDB 12 Plaintiff, SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16) 13 v. Pleading Amendment: June 28, 2024 Discovery Deadlines: 14 SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF Non-Expert: October 29, 2024 15 AMERICA, Expert: January 9, 2025 Mid-Discovery Status Conf.: September 13, 2024 Defendant. 16 Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 17 Filing: January 14, 2025 Hearing: February 19, 2025, 10:30 a.m. 18 Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 19 Filing: March 5, 2025 Hearing: April 16, 2025, 8:30 a.m. 20 Pre-Trial Conference: June 16, 2025, 1:30 p.m. 21 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 22 Trial: August 12, 2025, 8:30 a.m. 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 23 (Joint estimate 7 days) 24 25 26 In this action removed from state court on July 18, 2022, Plaintiff Thomas Ferro, M.D., alleges 27 that Defendant Safeco Insurance Company of America violated the covenant of good faith and fair 28 1 dealing in its handling of a claim made on the underinsured motorist benefit provision within the 2 automobile policy issued by Defendant to Plaintiff. 3 The parties convened via Zoom videoconference for a scheduling conference before Magistrate 4 Judge Christopher D. Baker on April 29, 2024. Arnold Hernandez appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. 5 Blake Russum appeared on behalf of Defendant. 6 I. Magistrate Judge Consent 7 Currently there is no joint consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. 8 Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing 9 Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the adopted policy of the Fresno Division of the 10 Eastern District is to trail all civil cases. The parties are hereby notified that for a trial date set before a 11 District Judge, the parties will trail indefinitely behind any higher priority criminal or older civil case 12 set on the same date until a courtroom becomes available. The trial date will not be reset. 13 The Magistrate Judges’ availability is far more realistic and accommodating to parties than that 14 of the District Judges who carry the heaviest caseloads in the nation and who must prioritize criminal 15 and older civil cases over more recently filed civil cases. A Magistrate Judge may conduct trials, 16 including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, 17 and Local Rule 305. Any appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate Judge is taken directly to 18 the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. 19 Therefore, the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to 20 conduct all further proceedings, including trial, and to file a consent/decline form (provided by the 21 Court at the inception of this case) indicating whether they will consent to the jurisdiction of the 22 Magistrate Judge. 23 II. Pleading Amendment 24 Any motions to amend the pleadings, including to add or substitute parties (including Doe 25 defendants) and/or allegations and claims, must be filed by June 28, 2024. Filing a motion and/or 26 stipulation requesting leave to amend the pleadings does not reflect on the propriety of the amendment 27 or imply good cause to modify the existing schedule, if necessary. All proposed amendments must 28 (A) be supported by good cause pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) if the amendment requires any 1 modification to the existing schedule, see Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 2 (9th Cir. 1992), and (B) establish, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), that such an amendment is not (1) 3 prejudicial to the opposing party, (2) the product of undue delay, (3) proposed in bad faith, or (4) 4 futile, see Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 5 III. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date 6 The parties represent that they have exchanged the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. 7 P. 26(a)(1). 8 The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before 9 October 29, 2024, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before January 9, 2025. 10 The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses1, in writing, on or before November 11 13, 2024, and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before December 10, 2024. The written 12 designation of retained and non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 13 26(a)(2), (A), (B), and (C) and shall include all information required thereunder. Failure to designate 14 experts in compliance with this order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other 15 evidence offered through such experts that are not disclosed pursuant to this order. 16 The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) and (5) shall apply to all discovery relating to 17 experts and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions 18 included in the designation. Failure to comply will result in the imposition of sanctions, which may 19 include striking the expert designation and preclusion of expert testimony. 20 The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party’s duty to timely supplement 21 disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced. 22 A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for September 13, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. before 23 Judge Baker. Counsel SHALL file a joint mid-discovery status conference report no later than one 24 week before the conference. Counsel also SHALL lodge the joint status report via e-mail to 25 CDBorders@caed.uscourts.gov. The joint status report SHALL outline the discovery counsel have 26 27 1 In the event an expert will offer opinions related to an independent medical or mental health 28 evaluation, the examination SHALL occur sufficiently in advance of the disclosure deadline so the expert’s report fully details the expert’s opinions in this regard. 1 completed and that which needs to be completed as well as any impediments to completing the 2 discovery within the deadlines set forth in this order. Counsel SHALL discuss settlement and certify 3 in the joint status report (1) that they have met/conferred regarding settlement, and (2) proposed dates 4 for convening a settlement conference before a U.S. Magistrate Judge. 5 IV. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule / Informal Discovery Dispute Conferences 6 All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later 7 than January 14, 2025,2 and heard on or before February 19, 2025. The Court hears non-dispositive 8 motions at 10:30 a.m. at the United States District Courthouse in Bakersfield, California before Judge 9 Baker. 10 No motion to amend or stipulation to amend the case schedule will be entertained unless it is 11 filed at least one week before the first deadline the parties wish to extend. Likewise, no written 12 discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the Court. A party with a discovery 13 dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve by agreement the 14 issues in dispute.

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

Ferro, M.D. v. Safeco Insurance Company of America, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

Ferro, M.D. v. Safeco Insurance Company of America (Ferro, M.D. v. Safeco Insurance Company of America) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Foman v. Davis
371 U.S. 178 (Supreme Court, 1962)