Lin v. Solta Medical, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California·Decided July 15, 2022·No. 4:21-cv-05062·Unknown

Opinion

Case No. 21-cv-05062-PJH Plaintiff,

v. CASE MANAGEMENT AND PRETRIAL ORDER

Defendant. Good cause appearing, the court hereby adopts the case management statement of the parties except as modified by the following:

TRIAL DATE: March 11, 2024, at 8:30 a.m., Courtroom 3, 3rd Fl., 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California. JURY [X] COURT [] TRIAL LENGTH: No more than 10 days. PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE: February 15, 2024, at 2:00 P.M. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS (Only one summary judgment motion per party is permitted without leave of court) TO BE HEARD BY: November 2, 2023. NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF: August 1, 2023 DISCLOSURE OF EXPERTS (retained and non-retained): PLA: April 1, 2023. DISCLOSURE OF EXPERTS (retained and non-retained): DEF: June 1, 2023. EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF: July 1, 2023. DISCOVERY LIMITATIONS: Interrogatories: Requests for Documents: DISCOVERY DISPUTES: Parties must file a joint letter brief not to exceed five pages. On receipt of the Joint Letter, the court will determine what, if any, future proceedings are necessary LAST DAY TO AMEND PLEADINGS: no later than 90 days before fact discovery cutoff date a motion or a stipulation must be filed so sufficient time remains to conduct discovery on added claims or parties. Doe defendants must be identified by this deadline, or they will be dismissed.

[X] REFERRED TO ADR FOR Private Mediation to be completed by August 1, 2023. ADDITIONAL ORDERS: PRETRIAL INSTRUCTIONS A. PRETRIAL MOTIONS 1. All dispositive motions are heard no later than 120 days before trial, unless leave of court is obtained for another deadline. 2. Only one summary judgment motion may be filed by each side, absent leave of court. Leave of court may be sought if multiple parties comprise one or both sides. Leave of court may be obtained by filing a motion for administrative relief pursuant to Civ. L. R. 7-11, or by requesting a case management conference or informal telephone conference. 3. Separate statements of undisputed facts in support of or in opposition to motions for summary judgment shall NOT be filed. See Civil L. R. 56-2. The parties may file a truly joint statement of undisputed facts only if all parties agree that the facts are undisputed. 4. Objections to evidence may no longer be filed separately but must be contained within a brief or memorandum. Civil L. R. 7-3. 5. Each party filing or opposing a motion shall also serve and file a proposed order which sets forth the relief or action sought and a short statement of the rationale of decision, including citation of authority that the party requests the court to adopt. 6. Chambers copies of each electronically-filed document must include on each page the running header created by the ECF system and must be delivered to the Clerk's Office by noon the day following its filing. (Note: These deadlines differ from those in Civil L. R. 5-1(e)(7)(A).) All documents must be stapled or bound by a two-pronged fastener, and all exhibits to declarations or requests for judicial notice must be tabbed. 7. Footnotes in briefs appearing in smaller than the 12-point font required for the text, will be stricken, see Civil L. R. 3-4(c)(2), as will footnotes that are so numerous as to be clearly designed to defeat the page limits found at Civil L. R. 7- 2 - 7-4. Any brief must separate sentences by 2 spaces after each sentence. 8. Motions pursuant to Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), challenging the reliability of expert testimony, may be noticed for hearing on the date dispositive motions will be heard or on any available hearing date up to and including the date of the final pretrial conference. Irrespective of the hearing date, the briefs shall be filed in accordance with Civil L. R. 7-2 - 7-5, that is, on a 35-day briefing schedule. 9. Motions in limine are limited to motions to exclude specific items of evidence on a ground and upon such authority as would be sufficient to sustain an objection to such evidence at trial. The court will not generally consider a motion presenting a purely legal issue in the guise of a motion in limine. 10. Discovery motions will be referred to a Magistrate Judge for resolution. The words "Discovery Matter" shall appear in the caption of all documents relating to discovery to insure proper routing. 11. Confidential and/or sealed documents shall be handled in accordance with this court's standing order and Civil L.R. 79-5, both of which the parties shall consult before moving for a protective order or requesting a sealing order. Requests to seal documents used in conjunction with dispositive motions are rarely granted 1. Each party shall attend personally or by counsel who will try the case. 2. Not less than 35 days prior to the pretrial conference, all counsel and/or parties shall meet and confer regarding preparation of the joint pretrial statement. 3. Not less than 28 days prior to the pretrial conference, counsel and/or parties shall: a. Serve and file a joint pretrial statement. (Separately filed statements will not be accepted by the court and monetary sanctions will be imposed upon the party failing to cooperate in the preparation of a joint statement). The pretrial statement shall include the following: i. A brief description of the substance of the claims and defenses which remain to be decided. ii. A detailed statement of all relief sought, itemizing all elements of damages claimed. iii. A statement of all relevant undisputed facts to which the parties will stipulate for incorporation into the trial record without the necessity of supporting testimony or exhibits. iv. A statement of all relevant disputed facts which remain to be decided. v. A statement of stipulations requested or proposed. vi. A brief statement of disputed points of law concerning liability and relief. Legal argument on these points shall be reserved for the trial briefs. vii. A statement of whether bifurcation or a separate trial of specific issues is feasible and desired. viii. A statement summarizing the status of settlement negotiations and indicating whether further negotiations are likely to be productive. b. Serve and file trial briefs (not to exceed 25 pages), which shall specify each cause of action and defense remaining to be tried along with a statement of the c. Serve and file no more than ten motions in limine, which shall be filed in one document not to exceed 25 pages; d. Serve and file a list of deposition excerpts for witnesses who will not testify in person, (specifying the witness, page and line references) and other discovery responses that will be offered at trial; e. Serve and file a list of all witnesses to be called at trial, in person or by deposition, other than solely for impeachment or rebuttal, with a brief statement describing the substance of the testimony to be given; f. Serve and file a numerical list of exhibits that will be offered as evidence in a party's case in chief in support of a claim or defense, with a brief statement describing the substance and purpose of each exhibit and the name of the sponsoring witness; g. Exchange exhibits which shall be premarked with an exhibit sticker (example attached), tabbed and in binders. Plaintiff shall use numbers (1, 2, 3, etc.) and defendant shall use numbers preceded by a letter (A-1, A-2, A-3, etc.). Additional parties shall also use a letter preceding numbers (B-1, B-2, B-3, or C-1, C-2, C-3, etc.). h. Submit two sets for jury trials and three sets for court trials of all premarked exhibits to the Clerk's Office (exhibits are not filed); i. Serve and file any request regarding the treatment of confidential or sealed documents. j. Serve and file proposed joint voir dire questions and joint jury instructions for cases to be tried by jury; k. Serve and file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for cases or claims to be tried by th

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

Lin v. Solta Medical, Inc., (N.D. Cal. 2022).

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

Related

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (Supreme Court, 1993)