Walker v. Stryker Corporation

District Court, S.D. California·Decided July 29, 2022·No. 3:22-cv-00264·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 KYLE WALKER, Case No.: 22-cv-00264-MMA-JLB

13 Plaintiff, ORDER: 14 v. (1) GRANTING EXTENSION OF 15 STRYKER EMPLOYMENT TIME TO BRING DISCOVERY COMPANY, LLC, et al., 16 DISPUTES; Defendants. 17 (2) GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO 18 AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER; AND 19

20 (3) ISSUING AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 21

22 [ECF Nos. 30; 35] 23 24 25 On July 28, 2022, the Court held an informal Discovery Conference before 26 Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt, to address the issues set forth in the joint discovery 27 statement submitted by the parties on July 13, 2022. (ECF Nos. 34; 36.) At the 28 conclusion of the Conference, the parties requested an extension of 30 days in order to 1 meet and confer further and then bring any remaining discovery disputes to the Court’s 2 attention. (ECF No. 36.) As stated in the Conference, the parties’ request is 3 GRANTED. Accordingly, the deadline to contact the Court with any remaining 4 discovery disputes related to the July 13, 2022 joint discovery statement, and any dispute 5 involving Defendant Howmedica Osteonics Corp.’s supplemental responses (see ECF 6 No. 34), is extended to August 29, 2022. 7 Also before the Court is the parties’ second Joint Motion to Amend the Scheduling 8 Order. (ECF No. 35.) Good cause appearing, and for the reasons discussed in the 9 Conference, the parties’ joint motion (ECF No. 35) is GRANTED, and the operative 10 Scheduling Order (ECF No. 30) is amended as follows: 11 1. All fact and expert discovery must be completed by all parties by 12 November 7, 2022. “Completed” means that all discovery under Rules 30-36 of the 13 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be 14 initiated a sufficient period of time in advance of the cut-off date, so that it may be 15 completed by the cut-off date, taking into account the times for service, notice and 16 response as set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Counsel must promptly 17 and in good faith meet and confer with regard to all discovery disputes in 18 compliance with Local Rule 26.1(a). The Court expects counsel to make every effort to 19 resolve all disputes without court intervention through the meet and confer process. 20 Discovery disputes must be brought to the Court’s attention in the time and manner 21 required by § V of Judge Burkhardt’s Civil Chambers Rules. All discovery disputes 22 must be raised within 30 calendar days of the service of an objection, answer, or 23 response that becomes the subject of dispute, or the passage of a discovery due date 24 without response or production, and only after counsel (and any unrepresented parties) 25 have met and conferred to resolve the dispute. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § V. 26 A failure to comply in this regard will result in a waiver of a party’s discovery issue. 27 Absent an order of the court, no stipulation continuing or altering this requirement 28 will be recognized by the court. 1 2. The parties must designate their respective experts in writing by 2 September 9, 2022. The parties must identify any person who may be used at trial to 3 present evidence pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Fed. R. Evid. This requirement 4 is not limited to retained experts. The date for exchange of rebuttal experts must be by 5 October 7, 2022. The written designations must include the name, address and telephone 6 number of the expert and a reasonable summary of the testimony the expert is expected to 7 provide. The list must also include the normal rates the expert charges for deposition and 8 trial testimony. 9 3. By September 9, 2022, each party must comply with the disclosure 10 provisions in Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and (C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This 11 disclosure requirement applies to all persons retained or specially employed to provide 12 expert testimony, or whose duties as an employee of the party regularly involve the 13 giving of expert testimony. Except as provided in the paragraph below, any party 14 that fails to make these disclosures will not, absent substantial justification, be 15 permitted to use evidence or testimony not disclosed at any hearing or at the time of 16 trial. In addition, the Court may impose sanctions as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 17 37(c). 18 4. Any party must supplement its disclosure regarding contradictory or rebuttal 19 evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) by October 7, 2022. 20 5. Failure to comply with this section or any other discovery order of the court 21 may result in the sanctions provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, including a prohibition on 22 the introduction of experts or other designated matters in evidence. 23 6. All dispositive pretrial motions, including motions for summary judgment 24 and motions addressing Daubert issues, must be filed by December 15, 2022.1 Counsel 25 for the moving party must obtain a motion hearing date from Judge Anello’s law clerk. 26 27 1 This deadline is not applicable to pretrial motions in limine. For further information regarding motions in limine, please refer to Judge Anello’s Civil Chambers 28 1 The period of time between the date you request a motion date and the hearing date may 2 vary from one district judge to another. Please plan accordingly. Failure to make a 3 timely request for a motion date may result in the motion not being heard. 4 7. If appropriate, following the filing of an order ruling on a motion for 5 summary judgment or other dispositive pretrial motion, or in the event no such motion is 6 filed, after the expiration of the deadline set forth in paragraph 8, supra, Judge Anello will 7 issue a pretrial scheduling order setting a pretrial conference, trial date, and all related 8 pretrial deadlines. The parties must review and be familiar with Judge Anello’s Civil 9 Chambers Rules, which provide additional information regarding pretrial scheduling. 10 8. The Mandatory Settlement Conference (“MSC”) is hereby rescheduled to 11 January 25, 2023 at 1:45 PM before Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt and will 12 occur by video conference.2 Mandatory directions for participating in the MSC by 13 video conference are attached hereto. The purpose of the MSC is to permit an 14 informal, candid discussion between the attorneys, parties, and the settlement judge of 15 every aspect of the lawsuit in an effort to achieve a mediated resolution of the case. All 16 MSC discussions will be off the record, privileged, and confidential. See CivLR 16.3(h). 17 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.3, all party representatives and claims adjusters for 18 insured defendants with full and unlimited authority3 to negotiate and enter into a binding 19

20 2 If any party believes the MSC is more likely to be successful if conducted in- 21 person, that party shall meet and confer on the issue with the other parties. After meeting and conferring, and no later than 60 days before the MSC, the parties shall leave a joint 22 voicemail with chambers at (619) 557-6624 indicating which of the parties requests an 23 in-person MSC. In the voicemail, the parties shall leave three mutually available dates for a telephonic status conference to discuss whether the MSC should be held in-person. 24 The final decision will be made by the Court.

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

Walker v. Stryker Corporation, (S.D. Cal. 2022).

Walker v. Stryker Corporation (Walker v. Stryker Corporation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related