1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TRI TOOL, INC., No. 2:22-cv-01515-DAD-CSK 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. SCHEDULING ORDER 14 THAD HALES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court has reviewed the 18 parties’ joint1 status report (Doc. No. 87) and has determined that the court need not “consult[] 19
20 1 The status report was filed by plaintiff Tri Tool, Inc. and defendant Enerpac Tool Group Corp. (collectively, “the corporate parties”). (Doc. No. 87 at 3.) In the status report, the corporate 21 parties state that the remaining parties to this action, defendants Thad Hales and Mike Bracikowski, have been unresponsive to by the corporate parties’ attempts to contact them “for an 22 extended period.” (Id. at 3 n.1.) According to the corporate parties, defendants Hales and 23 Bracikowski did not participate in the preparation of the status report. (Id.) A review of the docket in this action reflects that defendant Hales last filed anything on the docket in December 24 2022. (See Doc. No. 21.) The copies of all documents mailed to defendant Hales since December 2023 have been returned to the court marked as “undeliverable.” Defendant 25 Bracikowski last filed anything on the docket in October 2022. (See Doc. No. 12.) On March 3, 2025, plaintiff filed motions to compel the production of documents and requests for sanctions 26 against defendants Hales and Bracikowski. (See Doc. Nos. 81, 82.) Defendants Hales and 27 Bracikowski have failed to file oppositions to those motions. (See Doc. No. 86.) Moreover, neither defendant Hales or Bracikowski have responded to plaintiff’s first amended complaint 28 which was filed on November 9, 2023. 1 with the parties’ attorneys and any unrepresented parties at a scheduling conference,” before 2 issuing a scheduling order in this case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(1)(B). Accordingly, the court 3 vacates the initial scheduling conference set for April 14, 2025 and hereby issues this scheduling 4 order. 5 I. SERVICE OF PROCESS 6 The named defendants been served as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5. No 7 further service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown under Federal 8 Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). 9 II. JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL PARTIES / AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS 10 The parties do not anticipate the joinder of additional parties or amendment of the 11 pleadings. (Doc. No. 87 at 4.) 12 Any motions or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings must be filed by no 13 later than July 31, 2025, a date proposed by the parties. (Id.) No further joinder of parties or 14 amendments to pleadings is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown. See 15 Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 27 604 (9th Cir. 1992). 16 The parties are advised that the filing of motions and/or stipulations requesting leave to amend the 17 pleadings does not imply good cause to modify the existing schedule. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 (b)(4); 18 see also Johnson, 975 F. 2d at 609. Moreover, any amendment requested under Federal Rule of 19 Civil Procedure 15(a) must not be: (1) prejudicial to the opposing party; (2) the product of undue 20 delay; (3) proposed in bad faith; or (4) futile. See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 21 III. DISCOVERY PROCEDURES 22 Discovery matters that do not implicate the schedule of the case or that do not relate to 23 sealing or redaction of documents related to dispositive motions are referred to the assigned 24 United States Magistrate Judge, who will hear all discovery disputes subject to his or her 25 procedures. (The assigned magistrate judge’s initials follow the district judge’s initials next to the 26 case number.) All discovery documents must include the words “DISCOVERY MATTER” in 27 the caption to ensure proper routing. Do not direct delivery of courtesy copies of these 28 ///// 1 documents to the district judge. Counsel are directed to contact the magistrate judge’s courtroom 2 deputy clerk to schedule discovery matters for hearing. 3 All motions to compel discovery must be noticed on the assigned magistrate judge’s 4 calendar in accordance with the local rules of this court and the magistrate judge’s own 5 procedures. The written ruling of the assigned magistrate judge shall be final, subject to 6 modification by the district court only where it has been shown that the magistrate judge’s order 7 is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Pursuant to Local Rule 8 303, any party may file and serve a “Request for Reconsideration by the District Court of 9 Magistrate Judge’s Ruling.” See L.R. 303(c). The requesting party must file and serve any such 10 request within fourteen (14) days of service of a written ruling. L.R. 303(b). The request must 11 specify which portions of the ruling are clearly erroneous or contrary to law and the basis for that 12 contention with supporting points and authorities. L.R. 303(c). 13 In addition, the assigned magistrate judge reviews proposed discovery phase protective 14 orders sought by the parties pursuant to Local Rule 141.1. However, requests to seal or redact in 15 connection with dispositive motions or trial are decided by Judge Drozd and any such requests 16 must comply with Judge Drozd’s Standing Order and Local Rules 140 and 141. 17 IV. DISCOVERY DEADLINES 18 A. Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosures 19 The parties shall serve their initial disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 Rule 26(a)(1) no later than May 1, 2025, a date proposed by the parties. (Doc. No. 87 at 4.) 21 Any parties served or joined after the issuance of this scheduling order shall “make the 22 initial disclosures within 30 days after being served or joined,” as provided by Rule 26(a)(1)(D). 23 ///// 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 B. Fact Discovery 2 All fact discovery shall be completed2 no later than September 29, 2025, a date proposed 3 by the parties. (Doc. No. 87 at 5.) 4 The parties do not propose any limitations or changes to the governing provisions of the 5 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 6 C. Expert Discovery 7 Disclosures of expert witnesses, if any, must be made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 8 Procedure 26(a)(2)(A), (B) and (C), and shall include all information required thereunder. Each 9 expert witness must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions included in the 10 disclosures. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the imposition of 11 appropriate sanctions, including the preclusion of the expert’s testimony, or of other evidence 12 offered through the expert. 13 The parties shall disclose initial experts and produce reports in accordance with Federal 14 Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) by no later than September 22, 2025, a date proposed by the 15 parties. (Doc. No.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TRI TOOL, INC., No. 2:22-cv-01515-DAD-CSK 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. SCHEDULING ORDER 14 THAD HALES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court has reviewed the 18 parties’ joint1 status report (Doc. No. 87) and has determined that the court need not “consult[] 19
20 1 The status report was filed by plaintiff Tri Tool, Inc. and defendant Enerpac Tool Group Corp. (collectively, “the corporate parties”). (Doc. No. 87 at 3.) In the status report, the corporate 21 parties state that the remaining parties to this action, defendants Thad Hales and Mike Bracikowski, have been unresponsive to by the corporate parties’ attempts to contact them “for an 22 extended period.” (Id. at 3 n.1.) According to the corporate parties, defendants Hales and 23 Bracikowski did not participate in the preparation of the status report. (Id.) A review of the docket in this action reflects that defendant Hales last filed anything on the docket in December 24 2022. (See Doc. No. 21.) The copies of all documents mailed to defendant Hales since December 2023 have been returned to the court marked as “undeliverable.” Defendant 25 Bracikowski last filed anything on the docket in October 2022. (See Doc. No. 12.) On March 3, 2025, plaintiff filed motions to compel the production of documents and requests for sanctions 26 against defendants Hales and Bracikowski. (See Doc. Nos. 81, 82.) Defendants Hales and 27 Bracikowski have failed to file oppositions to those motions. (See Doc. No. 86.) Moreover, neither defendant Hales or Bracikowski have responded to plaintiff’s first amended complaint 28 which was filed on November 9, 2023. 1 with the parties’ attorneys and any unrepresented parties at a scheduling conference,” before 2 issuing a scheduling order in this case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(1)(B). Accordingly, the court 3 vacates the initial scheduling conference set for April 14, 2025 and hereby issues this scheduling 4 order. 5 I. SERVICE OF PROCESS 6 The named defendants been served as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5. No 7 further service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown under Federal 8 Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). 9 II. JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL PARTIES / AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS 10 The parties do not anticipate the joinder of additional parties or amendment of the 11 pleadings. (Doc. No. 87 at 4.) 12 Any motions or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings must be filed by no 13 later than July 31, 2025, a date proposed by the parties. (Id.) No further joinder of parties or 14 amendments to pleadings is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown. See 15 Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 27 604 (9th Cir. 1992). 16 The parties are advised that the filing of motions and/or stipulations requesting leave to amend the 17 pleadings does not imply good cause to modify the existing schedule. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 (b)(4); 18 see also Johnson, 975 F. 2d at 609. Moreover, any amendment requested under Federal Rule of 19 Civil Procedure 15(a) must not be: (1) prejudicial to the opposing party; (2) the product of undue 20 delay; (3) proposed in bad faith; or (4) futile. See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 21 III. DISCOVERY PROCEDURES 22 Discovery matters that do not implicate the schedule of the case or that do not relate to 23 sealing or redaction of documents related to dispositive motions are referred to the assigned 24 United States Magistrate Judge, who will hear all discovery disputes subject to his or her 25 procedures. (The assigned magistrate judge’s initials follow the district judge’s initials next to the 26 case number.) All discovery documents must include the words “DISCOVERY MATTER” in 27 the caption to ensure proper routing. Do not direct delivery of courtesy copies of these 28 ///// 1 documents to the district judge. Counsel are directed to contact the magistrate judge’s courtroom 2 deputy clerk to schedule discovery matters for hearing. 3 All motions to compel discovery must be noticed on the assigned magistrate judge’s 4 calendar in accordance with the local rules of this court and the magistrate judge’s own 5 procedures. The written ruling of the assigned magistrate judge shall be final, subject to 6 modification by the district court only where it has been shown that the magistrate judge’s order 7 is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Pursuant to Local Rule 8 303, any party may file and serve a “Request for Reconsideration by the District Court of 9 Magistrate Judge’s Ruling.” See L.R. 303(c). The requesting party must file and serve any such 10 request within fourteen (14) days of service of a written ruling. L.R. 303(b). The request must 11 specify which portions of the ruling are clearly erroneous or contrary to law and the basis for that 12 contention with supporting points and authorities. L.R. 303(c). 13 In addition, the assigned magistrate judge reviews proposed discovery phase protective 14 orders sought by the parties pursuant to Local Rule 141.1. However, requests to seal or redact in 15 connection with dispositive motions or trial are decided by Judge Drozd and any such requests 16 must comply with Judge Drozd’s Standing Order and Local Rules 140 and 141. 17 IV. DISCOVERY DEADLINES 18 A. Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosures 19 The parties shall serve their initial disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 Rule 26(a)(1) no later than May 1, 2025, a date proposed by the parties. (Doc. No. 87 at 4.) 21 Any parties served or joined after the issuance of this scheduling order shall “make the 22 initial disclosures within 30 days after being served or joined,” as provided by Rule 26(a)(1)(D). 23 ///// 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 B. Fact Discovery 2 All fact discovery shall be completed2 no later than September 29, 2025, a date proposed 3 by the parties. (Doc. No. 87 at 5.) 4 The parties do not propose any limitations or changes to the governing provisions of the 5 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 6 C. Expert Discovery 7 Disclosures of expert witnesses, if any, must be made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 8 Procedure 26(a)(2)(A), (B) and (C), and shall include all information required thereunder. Each 9 expert witness must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions included in the 10 disclosures. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the imposition of 11 appropriate sanctions, including the preclusion of the expert’s testimony, or of other evidence 12 offered through the expert. 13 The parties shall disclose initial experts and produce reports in accordance with Federal 14 Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) by no later than September 22, 2025, a date proposed by the 15 parties. (Doc. No. 87 at 5.) With regard to expert testimony intended solely for rebuttal, those 16 experts shall be disclosed and reports produced in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil 17 Procedure 26(a)(2) on or before October 6, 2025, a date proposed by the parties. (Id.) 18 All expert discovery shall be completed no later than October 20, 2025, a date proposed 19 by the parties. (Id.) 20 V. MOTIONS 21 All motions, except motions for continuances, temporary restraining orders, or other 22 emergency applications, shall be filed on or before November 4, 2025 and shall be noticed for 23 hearing before Judge Drozd on a date not more than 60 days from the date the motion is filed and 24 2 As used herein, the word “completed” means that all discovery shall have been conducted so 25 that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relevant to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has 26 been obeyed. The parties are advised that motions to compel must be filed in advance of the 27 discovery completion deadlines so that the court may grant effective relief within the allotted discovery time. A party’s failure to have a discovery dispute heard sufficiently in advance of the 28 discovery cutoff may result in denial of the motion as untimely. 1 on a date that is consistent with Judge Drozd’s Standing Order. Counsel are directed to refer to 2 the local rules regarding the requirements for noticing and opposing such motions on the court’s 3 regularly scheduled law and motion calendar. 4 Prior to filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for partial summary judgment 5 (summary adjudication), the parties are ordered to meet and confer, in person or by telephone, to 6 discuss the issues to be raised in the motion. In addition to complying with the requirements 7 of Local Rule 260, the parties must prepare a Joint Statement of Undisputed Facts, which 8 identifies all relevant facts subject to agreement by all parties. The moving party is 9 responsible for filing the joint statement concurrently with the motion. In the notice of motion, 10 the moving party shall certify that the parties have met and conferred as ordered above or provide 11 a statement of good cause for the failure to do so. 12 VI. SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 13 The undersigned requires parties to participate in a court-supervised settlement conference 14 with a settlement judge before the action may proceed to trial. A settlement conference has not 15 been set at this time. At any time before the final pretrial conference, the parties may file a joint 16 request that this action be referred to a settlement judge for the setting of a settlement conference. 17 If the parties have not participated in a court-supervised settlement conference by the time of the 18 final pretrial conference, the court will refer the action at that time to the assigned magistrate 19 judge for the setting of a settlement conference. The parties shall contact the designated 20 settlement conference judge’s chambers to ascertain that judge’s settlement conference 21 procedures, including the procedure for submitting confidential settlement statements, which shall 22 not be filed and will not otherwise be disclosed to the trial judge. 23 Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the court, the attorneys who will try the case 24 shall appear at the settlement conference. Pertinent evidence to be offered at trial, documents or 25 otherwise, should be brought to the settlement conference for presentation to the settlement judge. 26 Of course, neither the settlement conference statements nor communications during the settlement 27 conference with the settlement judge can be used by either party in the trial of this case. 28 ///// 1 Absent permission from the court, in addition to counsel who will try the case being 2 present, the individual parties shall also be present, and in the case of corporate parties, 3 associations or other entities, and insurance carriers, a representative executive with unrestricted 4 authority to discuss, consider, propose and agree, or disagree, to any settlement proposal or offer 5 shall also be present. If for any reason the representative with unlimited authority cannot attend, 6 such a person must be available by phone or video throughout the conference. In other words, 7 having settlement authority “up to a certain amount” is not acceptable. 8 VII. FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE 9 The final pretrial conference is set for April 13, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. before District Court 10 Judge Dale A. Drozd by Zoom. Parties will receive a Zoom ID number and password for the 11 final pretrial conference by email from Judge Drozd’s Courtroom Deputy Pete Buzo 12 (PBuzo@caed.uscourts.gov). Any other interested parties or members of the public may access 13 the conference telephonically by dialing 669−254−5252 and using meeting ID 161 413 4031 and 14 meeting passcode 125984 at the time of the conference. Because several matters may be set for 15 the same afternoon, the parties will be notified in advance of the conference at what specific time 16 the court anticipates calling their case so they can join the Zoom at that time. 17 The parties are directed to file a joint pretrial statement, carefully prepared and executed 18 by all counsel, that complies with the requirements of this Local Rule 281 and Judge Drozd’s 19 Standing Order. Counsel shall also email a copy of the joint pretrial statement in Word format to 20 Judge Drozd’s chambers at dadorders@caed.uscourts.gov. 21 The parties’ attention is directed to Local Rules 281 and 282. This court will insist upon 22 strict compliance with these rules. At the pretrial conference, the court will set deadlines to file 23 trial documents, including motions in limine, trial briefs, and proposed jury voir dire, instructions, 24 and verdict forms (where applicable). 25 VIII. JURY TRIAL 26 A jury trial is set for June 16, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4 before District Court 27 Judge Dale A. Drozd. Trial is anticipated to last 3–10 court days. (Doc. No. 87 at 6.) 28 ///// 1 IX. REQUEST FOR BIFURCATION, APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL MASTER, OR 2 OTHER TECHNIQUES TO SHORTEN TRIAL 3 The parties have not made any such requests at this time and do not anticipate any such 4 requests. 5 X. RELATED MATTERS PENDING 6 There is no related litigation. 7 XI. OBJECTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE SCHEDULING ORDER 8 This case schedule will become final without further order of the court unless 9 objections are filed within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this order. The schedule, once 10 final, shall not be modified except by leave of court upon showing of good cause. The assigned 11 magistrate judge is authorized to modify only the discovery dates to the extent any such 12 modification does not impact the balance of the schedule of the case. 13 The parties are reminded that pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil 14 Procedure, no stipulations extending scheduling requirements or modifying applicable rules are 15 effective until and unless the court approves them. Agreement of the parties by stipulation alone 16 does not constitute good cause. Any request or stipulation to modify this scheduling order must 17 set forth: 18 (1) the existing due date or hearing date as well as the discovery cutoff date, the last 19 date for hearing motions, the final pretrial conference date, and the trial date; 20 (2) whether there have been prior requests for extensions, and whether these were 21 granted or denied by the court; and 22 ///// 23 ///// 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 (3) specific, concrete reasons supporting good cause for granting of the extension. For 2 example, if the reason for the requested extension is that it “will promote 3 settlement,” the requesting party or parties must indicate the status of ongoing 4 negotiations, 1.e., have written proposals been exchanged; is counsel in the process 5 of reviewing a draft settlement agreement; has a mediator been selected. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. "| Dated: _ April 3, 2025 Dab A. 2, sxe 8 DALE A. DROZD 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28