1 THE HONORABLE KYMBERLY K. EVANSON
6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE
9 PAMINA, LLC, as owner of the vessel, M/V IN ADMIRALTY PAMINA (Official Number 1143720), BRIAN 10 PICKERING and LAURIE PICKERING, as No. 2:22-cv-01679-KKE sole members of PAMINA, LLC, and 11 MARKEL AMERICAN INSURANCE 12 COMPANY, as subrogee of Pamina, LLC, JOINT STIPULATED MOTION Brian Pickering and Laurie Pickering, FOR TRIAL CONTINUANCE AND 13 ORDER Third-Party Plaintiffs, 14 HEARING DATE: 15 v. October 31, 2023
16 DELTA MARINE INDUSTRIES, INC., N C POWER SYSTEMS CO., GLENDINNING 17 PRODUCTS LLC, and DOCKMATE, INC.,
18 Third-Party Defendants, 19 IN RE: COMPLAINT AND PETITION OF 20 PAMINA, LLC, as owner of the vessel, PAMINA, FOR EXONERATION FROM OR 21 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 22
23 I. RELIEF REQUESTED 24 The parties to this action hereby jointly move the Court, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25 6(b)(1), to extend the discovery deadline and deadline for submitting expert reports by ninety 26 (90) days, for good cause shown, as hereinafter set forth. 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 II. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS 2 This is a case of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction brought under 28 U.S.C. §1333 3 and filed pursuant to Rule 9(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule F, 4 Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims of the Federal Rules of Civil 5 Procedure. The case arises from a maritime accident involving the Vessel, Pamina. On May 28, 6 2022, the Vessel, while transiting through the Ballard Locks in Seattle, Washington, allegedly 7 8 and without warning, started to move in reverse while the engine control levers were in neutral 9 causing collisions with multiple other vessels and causing damages to these vessels as well as 10 to the Pamina. 11 On November 22, 2022, Pamina, and its owners and insurer, initiated this action by 12 filing a Complaint for Exoneration from Limitation of Liability (“LOLA” action). On 13 January 19, 2022, this Court, pursuant to Supplemental Admiralty Rule F (3), ordered all other 14 15 actions arising from this maritime accident stayed until the termination of the LOLA action and 16 further ordered that any claimant wishing to assert a claim in the LOLA action must do so by 17 March 1, 2023. 18 On March 1, 2023, Pamina and its owners, Brian and Laurie Pickering, and its insurer, 19 Markel American Insurance Company (Plaintiffs-In-Limitation), filed a Third-Party Complaint 20 (and First Amended Complaint on July 6, 2023) against Third Party Defendants, DELTA 21 MARINE INDUSTRIES, INC, N C POWER SYSTEMS CO., GLENDINNING PRODUCTS 22 23 LLC, and DOCKMATE, INC., alleging that the damages related to this maritime accident 24 arose due to these parties’ negligent inspections, installation, supervision, or maintenance of the 25 Vessel’s engine systems. Alternatively, it is alleged that GLENDINNING PRODUCTS LLC 26 and/or DOCKMATE, INC. defectively designed and/or defectively manufactured the electronic 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 and/or wireless engine control systems or component parts thereof. In addition to numerous 2 affirmative claims filed by the parties, cross claims have been filed in this action by Third-Party 3 Defendants against one another. 4 In addition to Plaintiffs-In-Limitation, five (5) other interested parties have filed claims. 5 Also, as noted, there are four (4) parties against whom claims of negligence and defective 6 design and manufacturing have been brought and these parties have asserted cross claims 7 8 against one another. Resolution of the case will require extensive written discovery. In addition, 9 the parties have engaged experts. Also, it is anticipated that the depositions of all interested 10 parties and of their experts will be required to resolve this claim. 11 The parties’ counsel have conferred and agree that additional time is required to 12 complete discovery than currently allowed under the Court’s ORDER SETTING TRIAL 13 DATES entered on May 17, 2023. Pursuant to the Court’s current case scheduling order, the 14 15 parties’ expert reports are due on December 4, 2023, and the discovery deadline is January 3, 16 2024. Notwithstanding best efforts and progress towards the completion of discovery, given the 17 number of party claimants, Third-Party Defendants, and experts engaged by these parties in the 18 case, it will require approximately an additional ninety (90) days to produce expert reports and 19 complete discovery. Below is a proposed timeline: 20 21 BENCH TRIAL DATE July 1, 2024 October 7, 2024 22 23 Reports from experts December 4, 2024 March 4, 2024 24 Discovery Completed by January 3, 2024 June 14, 2024 25 Dispositive motions filed by February 4, 2024 July 12, 2024 26 Motions in limine filed by May 28, 2024 August 28, 2024 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 Joint pretrial statement June 3, 2024 September 3, 2024 2 Pretrial conference June 18, 2024 September 18, 2024 3 Length of bench trial 7-10 days 7-10 days 4
5 III. LAW AND ARGUMENT 6 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(6) authorizes a district court to grant timely 7 motions to extend time for “good cause.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) (upon a showing of good 8 cause, a court may extend a deadline to act “if a request is made before the original time or its 9 extension expires ...”). See also Lujan v. Nat’l Wildlife, Fed. 497 U.S. 871, 896 (1990) (cause 10 must be shown before enlargement of time is granted). “Good cause” is a “non-rigorous 11 12 standard,” but still requires the requesting party to provide a reasonable explanation as to why, 13 despite the party's diligence, the set deadline cannot be met. United States v. Navarro, 800 14 F.3d 1104, 1109 (9th Cir. 2015). The plain language of the rule demonstrates that the good 15 cause standard in the rule is at a court's discretion. (“the court may, for good cause, extend the 16 time”) (emphasis added); Manzano v. California Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 467 Fed. Appx. 683, 17 685 (9th Cir. 2012) (recognizing abuse of discretion standard as to FRCP 6(b)). 18 The parties’ joint motion to extend the deadlines in this case is brought before the Court 19 20 now, well prior to the existing deadlines. Also, the parties submit that their request meets the 21 requirement that a showing of good cause must be made for this Court to grant this Motion. 22 The ‘good cause’ shown are the facts set forth above concerning the number of party claimants, 23 Third-Party Plaintiffs and Third-Party Defendants. These parties have filed affirmative claims, 24 third-party claims, and cross claims. Moreover, it is anticipated that these numerous parties will 25 retain experts to assist the parties in determining the cause and responsibility for the maritime 26 accident the subject of this case. 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 IV. CONCLUSION 2 For good cause shown, the parties respectfully request that the Court grant their Motion, 3 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 THE HONORABLE KYMBERLY K. EVANSON
6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE
9 PAMINA, LLC, as owner of the vessel, M/V IN ADMIRALTY PAMINA (Official Number 1143720), BRIAN 10 PICKERING and LAURIE PICKERING, as No. 2:22-cv-01679-KKE sole members of PAMINA, LLC, and 11 MARKEL AMERICAN INSURANCE 12 COMPANY, as subrogee of Pamina, LLC, JOINT STIPULATED MOTION Brian Pickering and Laurie Pickering, FOR TRIAL CONTINUANCE AND 13 ORDER Third-Party Plaintiffs, 14 HEARING DATE: 15 v. October 31, 2023
16 DELTA MARINE INDUSTRIES, INC., N C POWER SYSTEMS CO., GLENDINNING 17 PRODUCTS LLC, and DOCKMATE, INC.,
18 Third-Party Defendants, 19 IN RE: COMPLAINT AND PETITION OF 20 PAMINA, LLC, as owner of the vessel, PAMINA, FOR EXONERATION FROM OR 21 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 22
23 I. RELIEF REQUESTED 24 The parties to this action hereby jointly move the Court, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25 6(b)(1), to extend the discovery deadline and deadline for submitting expert reports by ninety 26 (90) days, for good cause shown, as hereinafter set forth. 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 II. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS 2 This is a case of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction brought under 28 U.S.C. §1333 3 and filed pursuant to Rule 9(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule F, 4 Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims of the Federal Rules of Civil 5 Procedure. The case arises from a maritime accident involving the Vessel, Pamina. On May 28, 6 2022, the Vessel, while transiting through the Ballard Locks in Seattle, Washington, allegedly 7 8 and without warning, started to move in reverse while the engine control levers were in neutral 9 causing collisions with multiple other vessels and causing damages to these vessels as well as 10 to the Pamina. 11 On November 22, 2022, Pamina, and its owners and insurer, initiated this action by 12 filing a Complaint for Exoneration from Limitation of Liability (“LOLA” action). On 13 January 19, 2022, this Court, pursuant to Supplemental Admiralty Rule F (3), ordered all other 14 15 actions arising from this maritime accident stayed until the termination of the LOLA action and 16 further ordered that any claimant wishing to assert a claim in the LOLA action must do so by 17 March 1, 2023. 18 On March 1, 2023, Pamina and its owners, Brian and Laurie Pickering, and its insurer, 19 Markel American Insurance Company (Plaintiffs-In-Limitation), filed a Third-Party Complaint 20 (and First Amended Complaint on July 6, 2023) against Third Party Defendants, DELTA 21 MARINE INDUSTRIES, INC, N C POWER SYSTEMS CO., GLENDINNING PRODUCTS 22 23 LLC, and DOCKMATE, INC., alleging that the damages related to this maritime accident 24 arose due to these parties’ negligent inspections, installation, supervision, or maintenance of the 25 Vessel’s engine systems. Alternatively, it is alleged that GLENDINNING PRODUCTS LLC 26 and/or DOCKMATE, INC. defectively designed and/or defectively manufactured the electronic 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 and/or wireless engine control systems or component parts thereof. In addition to numerous 2 affirmative claims filed by the parties, cross claims have been filed in this action by Third-Party 3 Defendants against one another. 4 In addition to Plaintiffs-In-Limitation, five (5) other interested parties have filed claims. 5 Also, as noted, there are four (4) parties against whom claims of negligence and defective 6 design and manufacturing have been brought and these parties have asserted cross claims 7 8 against one another. Resolution of the case will require extensive written discovery. In addition, 9 the parties have engaged experts. Also, it is anticipated that the depositions of all interested 10 parties and of their experts will be required to resolve this claim. 11 The parties’ counsel have conferred and agree that additional time is required to 12 complete discovery than currently allowed under the Court’s ORDER SETTING TRIAL 13 DATES entered on May 17, 2023. Pursuant to the Court’s current case scheduling order, the 14 15 parties’ expert reports are due on December 4, 2023, and the discovery deadline is January 3, 16 2024. Notwithstanding best efforts and progress towards the completion of discovery, given the 17 number of party claimants, Third-Party Defendants, and experts engaged by these parties in the 18 case, it will require approximately an additional ninety (90) days to produce expert reports and 19 complete discovery. Below is a proposed timeline: 20 21 BENCH TRIAL DATE July 1, 2024 October 7, 2024 22 23 Reports from experts December 4, 2024 March 4, 2024 24 Discovery Completed by January 3, 2024 June 14, 2024 25 Dispositive motions filed by February 4, 2024 July 12, 2024 26 Motions in limine filed by May 28, 2024 August 28, 2024 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 Joint pretrial statement June 3, 2024 September 3, 2024 2 Pretrial conference June 18, 2024 September 18, 2024 3 Length of bench trial 7-10 days 7-10 days 4
5 III. LAW AND ARGUMENT 6 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(6) authorizes a district court to grant timely 7 motions to extend time for “good cause.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) (upon a showing of good 8 cause, a court may extend a deadline to act “if a request is made before the original time or its 9 extension expires ...”). See also Lujan v. Nat’l Wildlife, Fed. 497 U.S. 871, 896 (1990) (cause 10 must be shown before enlargement of time is granted). “Good cause” is a “non-rigorous 11 12 standard,” but still requires the requesting party to provide a reasonable explanation as to why, 13 despite the party's diligence, the set deadline cannot be met. United States v. Navarro, 800 14 F.3d 1104, 1109 (9th Cir. 2015). The plain language of the rule demonstrates that the good 15 cause standard in the rule is at a court's discretion. (“the court may, for good cause, extend the 16 time”) (emphasis added); Manzano v. California Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 467 Fed. Appx. 683, 17 685 (9th Cir. 2012) (recognizing abuse of discretion standard as to FRCP 6(b)). 18 The parties’ joint motion to extend the deadlines in this case is brought before the Court 19 20 now, well prior to the existing deadlines. Also, the parties submit that their request meets the 21 requirement that a showing of good cause must be made for this Court to grant this Motion. 22 The ‘good cause’ shown are the facts set forth above concerning the number of party claimants, 23 Third-Party Plaintiffs and Third-Party Defendants. These parties have filed affirmative claims, 24 third-party claims, and cross claims. Moreover, it is anticipated that these numerous parties will 25 retain experts to assist the parties in determining the cause and responsibility for the maritime 26 accident the subject of this case. 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 IV. CONCLUSION 2 For good cause shown, the parties respectfully request that the Court grant their Motion, 3 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), to extend the deadline for submitting expert reports by 4 ninety (90) days, to March 6, 2024, and that the discovery deadline be extended to March 24, 5 2024, and that all other case dates, including the trial date, be continued by ninety (90) days to 6 dates convenient to the Court. 7 Dated this 27th day of October, 2023 Dated this 30th day of October, 2023 8 Counsel for Glendinnings Products Counsel for Plaintiff 9 s/William J. Dow______________________ s/Otis Felder ______________________ 10 Francis S. Floyd, WSBA #10642 B. Otis Felder, WSBA #24057 11 William J. Dow, WSBA #51155 Conor F. McCauley, WSBA #58436 Drew A. Carson, WSBA #48929 Wilson Elser Mostkowitz Edelman & Dicker 12 Floyd Pflueger & Ringer 1700 – 7th Avenue, Ste. 2100 3101 Western Avenue, Ste. 400 Seattle, WA 98101 13 Seattle, WA 98121 (206) 709-5900 (206) 441-4455 Otis.Felder@wilsonelser.com 14 ffloyd@floyd-ringer.com Fabiola.sanchez@wilsonelser.com 15 erin@floyd-rigner.com Otis.felder@yahoo.com wdow@floyd-ringer.com Conor.mccauley@wilsonelser.com 16 dcarson@floyd-ringer.com tbolte@floyd-ringer.com 17 Dated this 25th day of October, 2023 Dated this 25th day of October, 2023 18
19 Counsel for Markel American Insurance Counsel for Lake Washington Yacht Charters
20 s/Jonathan Thames s/ Wayne Mitchell______________________ Jonathan W. Thames, WSBA #31060 Wayne Mitchell, WSBA #24347 21 Kennedys CMK, LLP Anderson & Mitchell, PLLC 455 Market St, Ste 1900 1239 120th Ave NE, Ste. A 22 San Francisco, CA 94105 Bellevue, WA 98005 23 (415) 323-4460 206-229-7296 jonathan.thames@kennedyslaw.com wayne@andersonmitchell.com 24 alice.probst@kennedyslaw.com brad.pace@kennedyslaw.com 25 helen.davis@kennedyslaw.com juli.carter@kennedyslaw.com 26 SFKennedysDocket@kennedyslaw.com 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 Dated this 23rd day of October, 2023 Dated this 24th day of October, 2023
2 Co- Counsel for Lake Washington Yacht Counsel for Atlantic Specialty Ins. Co. Charters 3
4 s/Paul T. Landis s/ Joseph Tabrisky____________________ Paul Landis, WSBA # Joseph P. Tabrisky, 5 Bauman Loewe Witt & Maxwell, PLLC Law Offices of Richard E. Bishop 8765 E Bell Rd., Ste. 210 222 S Harbor Blvd, Ste. 900 6 Scottsdale, AZ 85260-1321 Anaheim, CA 92805 (480) 502-4664 (781) 332-7188 7 plandis@blwmlawfirm.com jtabrisky@intactinsurance.com 8 malderson@blwmlawfirm.com jsteinebrenner@intactinsurance.com tdinardo@blwmlawfirm.com valejo@intactinsurance.com 9 socalsc@intactinsurance.com
10 Dated this 26th day of October, 2023 Dated this 26th day of October, 2023 11
12 Co-Counsel for Atlantic Specialty Ins. Co. Counsel for Delta Marine Industries 13 s/Dustin Hamilton_____________________ s/Thomas G. Waller__________________ Dustin Hamilton, WSBA # Thomas G. Waller, WSBA #22963 14 Legros Buchanan & Paul Kellin Tompkins, WSBA #60514 4025 Delridge Way SW, Suite 500 Bauer Moynihan & Johnson, LLP 15 Seattle, WA 98106 2101 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2400 206-623-4990 Seattle, WA 98121 16 dhamilton@legros.com (206) 905-3232 17 jporter@legros.com tgwaller@bmjlaw.com sbaskins@legros.com ktompkins@bmjlaw.com 18 kchan@bmjlaw.com
19 // 20 // 21 // 22 // 23 // 24 // 25
26 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 2 Dated this 30th day of October, 2023 Dated this 30th day of October, 2023 3
Counsel for N C. Power Systems Co. Counsel for Dockmate, Inc. 4
5 s/Todd Rosencrans __________________ s/Nicholas Larson __________________ Todd W. Rosencrans, WSBA #26551 Nicholas Larson, WSBA #46034 6 Monique Wirrick, WSBA # Murphy Pearson Bradley & Feeney Perkins Coie, LLP 1455 NW Leary Way, Ste. 400 7 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, WA 98107 8 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 (206) 219-2008 (206) 359-8000 nlarson@mpbf.com 9 trosencrans@perkinscoie.com mwirrick@perkinscoie.com 10 MLewis@perkinscoie.com Sbilger@perkinscoie.com 11 docketseapl@perkinscoie.com 12
13 Dated this 30th day of October, 2023 Dated this 30th day of October, 2023 14 Counsel for Federal Insurance Company, Co - Counsel for Federal Insurance 15 Geico Marine Insurance Company and Company, Geico Marine Insurance Company 16 Nicholas Leede and Nicholas Leede
17 s/Chih Yu____________________________ s/Vi Jean Reno ________________________ 18 Chih Yu (Joseph) Ou, CA Bar#294090 Vi Jean Reno, WSBA # 9385 Tyler John Kirsch, CA Bar#332666 Reno Law Seattle 19 Gibson Robb & Lindh 1420 Fifth Ave, Suite 3000 20 1255 Powell Street Seattle, WA 98101 Emeryville, CA 94680 (206)622-4100 21 (415) 348-6000 vjreno@renolawsea.com jou@gibsonrobb.com 22 tkirsch@gibsonrobb.com renolawsea@yahoo.com
efiling@gibsonrobb.com 23
24 25 26 27 F , P & R P.S. 1 ORDER 2 The Court GRANTS the parties’ stipulated motion. Dkt. No. 99. The parties are now 3 required to follow the following case schedule to prepare this matter for trial: 4 5 6 BENCH TRIAL DATE July 1, 2024 October 7, 2024 7 Reports from experts December 4, 2024 March 4, 2024 8 9 Discovery Completed by January 3, 2024 June 14, 2024 10 Dispositive motions filed by February 4, 2024 July 12, 2024 11 Motions in limine filed by May 28, 2024 August 28, 2024 12 Joint pretrial statement June 3, 2024 September 3, 2024 13 Pretrial conference June 18, 2024 September 27, 2024 14 Length of bench trial 7-10 days 7-10 days 15
16 DATED: October 31, 2023 17 18 19 A 20 Kymberly K. Evanson United States District Judge 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 F , P & R P.S.