Glenn v. Trident Seafood Company

Opinion

1 The Honorable Marsha J. Pechman

4 5 8 TRAVIS GLENN, No. 2:20-cv-01583 MJP

9 Plaintiff, STIPULATED MOTION TO CONTINUE DISCOVERY DEADLINES – SO ORDERED 10 vs. NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: September 29, 2021

12 Defendant.

13 15 Pursuant to Local Rule 10(g) for the Western District of Washington, Plaintiff Travis Glenn 16 (“Glenn”) and Defendant Trident Seafood Company (“Trident”) by and through their respective 17 attorneys, hereby submit this stipulated motion requesting the Court to extend the discovery cut 18 off date by 60-days, from November 12, 2021 to January 10, 2022, and to extend the deadline for 19 filing and noting all motions related to discovery from October 13, 2021, to December 12, 2021. 20 This case concerns employment discrimination and retaliation that allegedly occurred in Sand 21 Point, Alaska. 22 Trident is a seafood harvesting and processing company based in Seattle, Washington, with 23 operations in various remote locations of Alaska which function seasonally. Glenn was hired to 24 work on the production line in Sand Point, Alaska in 2019 as a seafood processor. Glenn seeks to 25 take a number of depositions of processors and managers who are currently based in two remote 26 locations, Sand Point and Akutan, Alaska. At this time, Trident’s employees are at the height of 27 the processing season and are working long hours and are moving between plants. Additionally, 1 due to the remote location internet and cell coverage are spotty. 2 Trident needs time to prepare its employees for depositions, including discussing the 3 process, each employee’s role, and making them available for a video or audio depositions. Given 4 the long shifts, scarce reception, and time difference between Alaska and Washington, scheduling 5 depositions will take more time than usual. If reception cuts out, the depositions may need to be 6 rescheduled or extended. 7 Additionally, a key witness to the matter, Maskym Khoroshevsky, has returned home to 8 Ukraine and Trident is currently looking to locate him, contact him, and ensure his availability. He 9 will likely be returning to Alaska in January to work for Trident in its next fishing season. 10 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) governs the modification of scheduling orders 11 and discovery plans. It provides that "[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause and with 12 the judge's consent." Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The good cause inquiry focuses primarily on the 13 movant's diligence. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). Local 14 Rule 10(g) supplements Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 and provides “[i]f a stipulated motion would alter dates 15 or schedules previously set by the court, the parties shall clearly state the reasons justifying the 16 proposed change.” Local Rule 16(b)(5) provides that “[m]ere failure to complete discovery within 17 the time allowed does not constitute cause for an extension or continuance”. 18 There is good cause for a short discovery extension, and this is not a case of “mere failure 19 to complete discovery”. The circumstances of the case are unique, and the parties have not 20 neglected the case. In fact, the parties have forged a good working relationship to obtain what the 21 parties agree is relevant information in the matter, but due to the nature of the Pollock fishing 22 season, which Trident is currently processing, depositions have been difficult to schedule. From 23 June through the end of October the Pollock fishing season is at its busiest and requires employees 24 to be in remote areas of Alaska which have spotty internet coverage. Further, this time of season 25 requires all employees to work long days and frequently run into overtime. 26 Furthermore, until recently, Trident has been supplementing its discovery responses in 27 response to Glenn’s objections to those responses. Trident just recently completed its 1 supplementation and this, too, needed to precede depositions, making it difficult to schedule 2 depositions before this time. 3 In addition, one of the employees, whose deposition is essential, Maskym Khoroshevsky, 4 has returned home to Ukraine as his work visa was expiring. Although Glenn requested (more than 5 once) Mr. Khoroshevsky’s deposition before he left the country, Trident could not get the 6 information relayed to Mr. Khoroshevsky before he was laid off and required to return to Ukraine. 7 Trident is working to track him down and hopes he will return for the fishing season beginning in 8 January. Thus allowing a discovery extension will provide Plaintiff the proper time to obtain 9 Khoroshevsky’s deposition. 10 Trial is scheduled for April 11, 2022. Discovery will still be completed three months in 11 advance so a discovery extension will not cause delay. As such, the parties respectfully request a 12 60-day extension of the discovery cutoff date to allow depositions of key employees to occur 13 without causing undue burden on Trident’s current season, and a concomitant 60-day extension of 14 the discovery motions date. 15 DATED this 29th day of September, 2021 16 Presented by:

17 Kram & Wooster, P.S. Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP 18 Allen McKenzie Benjamin J. Stone 19 Allen McKenzie, WSBA #48703 Benjamin J. Stone, WSBA # 33436 1901 South I. Street 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 2700 20 Tacoma, WA 98405 Seattle, WA 98101 (253) 572-4161/ (253) 572-4167 (fax) (206) 436-2020 / (206) 436-2030 Fax 21 Allen@kjwmlaw.com benjamin.stone@lewisbrisbois.com 22 Attorney for Plaintiff Attorney for Defendant

23 IT IS SO ORDERED 24 Dated this 4th day of October, 2021. A 25 26 Marsha J. Pechman 27 United States Senior District Judge