gno.law

District Court, S.D. California · 3:23-cv-02335 · 2026-04-22 · Unknown

JASJEET DHILLON., et al. v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., et al.

Proceeding
district
Area
civil
Panel
Jill L. Burkhardt (author)

Analysis

A model's reading — qwen3.8-27b, prompt own-v1, 2026-10-13T20:33Z · confidence high

The court considered Defendant 7-Eleven's ex parte motion to amend the scheduling order to extend deadlines by 90 days, which was opposed by the plaintiffs who argued for a shorter extension. The court granted the motion in part, amending the scheduling order to set a fact discovery deadline of June 16, 2026, and adjusting subsequent expert and pretrial deadlines accordingly.

What the court decidedThe model
Grant in part Defendant 7-Eleven's Ex Parte Motion to Amend Scheduling Order
“Good Order (ECF No. 53) is AMENDED as follows:”
agree with court
The court exercised its inherent authority to manage the docket and modify scheduling orders. While the order does not explicitly state the 'good cause' standard or the specific reasoning for choosing the June 16, 2026 date over the requested 90-day extension or the plaintiff's proposed shorter extension, the decision to amend the schedule is a routine exercise of case management authority. The result is defensible as a compromise between the parties' positions, though the specific rationale is not detailed in the text.

The order itself: sound — The order is a standard case management order. It correctly cites the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules governing discovery and settlement conferences. The reliance on Heileman Brewing is appropriate for the settlement conference attendance requirement. The order is procedurally sound, although it lacks a detailed explanation for the specific dates chosen, which is common in such orders.

How this analysis was made · dispute it

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JASJEET DHILLON., et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-02335-JES-JLB 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IN PART EX 13 PARTE MOTION TO 14 v. AMEND/CORRECT SCHEDULING ORDER 15 7-ELEVEN, INC., et al., 16 [ECF No. 66] Defendants, 18 v. 19 JASJEET DHILLON, 20 21 Third-party Defendant 22 23 Before the Court is Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff 7-Eleven’s Ex Parte 24 Motion to Amend Scheduling Order, requesting an extension of 90 days. (ECF No. 25 66.) On April 14, 2026, an opposition to the ex-parte request was filed contending 26 that a shorter extension regarding the fact discovery deadline was necessary but all 27 other deadlines in the Scheduling Order need not be extended. (ECF No. 68.) Good Order (ECF No. 53) is AMENDED as follows: 1 1. All fact discovery shall be completed by all parties by June 16, 2026. 2 “Completed” means that all discovery under Rules 30–36 of the Federal Rules of 3 Civil Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be initiated a 4 sufficient period of time in advance of the cut-off date, so that it may be completed 5 by the cut-off date, taking into account the times for service, notice and response as 6 set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The previously expired deadline 7 to propound written discovery is not extended. 8 Counsel shall promptly and in good faith meet and confer with regard to 9 all discovery disputes in compliance with Local Rule 26.1.a. The Court expects 10 counsel to make every effort to resolve all disputes without court intervention 11 through the meet and confer process. Discovery disputes must be brought to the 12 Court’s attention in the time and manner required by § V of Judge Burkhardt’s Civil 13 Chambers Rules. All discovery disputes must be raised within 30 calendar days 14 of the service of an objection, answer, or response that becomes the subject of 15 dispute, or the passage of a discovery due date without response or production, and 16 only after counsel (and any unrepresented parties) have met and conferred to resolve 17 the dispute. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § V. A failure to comply in this 18 regard will result in a waiver of a party’s discovery issue. Absent an order of 19 the court, no stipulation continuing or altering this requirement will be 20 recognized by the court. 21 2. The parties shall designate their respective experts in writing by 22 July 14, 2026. The parties must identify any person who may be used at trial to 23 present evidence pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Fed. R. Evid. This 24 requirement is not limited to retained experts. The date for exchange of rebuttal 25 experts shall be by July 28, 2026. The written designations shall include the name, 26 address and telephone number of the expert and a reasonable summary of the 27 rates the expert charges for deposition and trial testimony. 1 3. By August 25, 2026, each party shall comply with the disclosure 2 provisions in Rule 26(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This 3 disclosure requirement applies to all persons retained or specially employed to 4 provide expert testimony, or whose duties as an employee of the party regularly 5 involve the giving of expert testimony. Except as provided in the paragraph 6 below, any party that fails to make these disclosures shall not, absent 7 substantial justification, be permitted to use evidence or testimony not disclosed 8 at any hearing or at the time of trial. In addition, the Court may impose 9 sanctions as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c). 10 4. Any party shall supplement its disclosure regarding contradictory or 11 rebuttal evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) by September 8, 2026. 12 5. All expert discovery shall be completed by all parties by 13 October 8, 2026. The parties shall comply with the same procedures set forth in the 14 paragraph governing fact discovery. 15 6. Failure to comply with the above paragraphs or any other discovery 16 order of the court may result in the sanctions provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, 17 including a prohibition on the introduction of experts or other designated matters in 18 evidence. 19 7. All pretrial motions, other than motions to amend or join parties, or 20 motions in limine, shall be filed on or before November 10, 2026. Motions will not 21 be heard or calendared unless counsel for the moving party has obtained a motion 22 hearing date from the law clerk of the judge who will hear the motion. Be advised 23 that the period of time between the date you request a motion date and the 24 hearing date may be up to sixty (60) days. Please plan accordingly. Failure of 25 counsel to timely request a motion date may result in the motion not being heard. 26 Motions in limine are to be filed as directed in the Local Rules, or as otherwise set 27 Briefs or memoranda in support of or in opposition to any pending motion 1 shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length without leave of the judge who will 2 hear the motion. No reply memorandum shall exceed ten (10) pages without such 3 leave of court. Briefs and memoranda exceeding ten (10) pages in length shall have 4 a table of contents and a table of authorities cited. 5 8. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1.f.3.c, if an opposing party fails to file 6 opposition papers in the time and manner required by Civil Local Rule 7.1.e.2, 7 that failure may constitute a consent to the granting of a motion or other 8 request for ruling by the Court. Accordingly, all parties are ordered to abide by 9 the terms of Civil Local Rule 7.1.e.2 or otherwise face the prospect of any pretrial 10 motion being granted as an unopposed motion pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1.f.3.c. 11 9. A Mandatory Settlement Conference (“MSC”) will be held by video 12 conference1 on October 27, 2026 at 1:45 PM before Magistrate Judge Jill L. 13 Burkhardt. Mandatory directions for participating in the MSC by video 14 conference are attached hereto. The purpose of the MSC is to permit an informal, 15 candid discussion between the attorneys, parties, and the settlement judge of every 16 aspect of the lawsuit in an effort to achieve a mediated resolution of the case. All 17 MSC discussions will be off the record, privileged, and confidential. See CivLR 18 16.3.h. 19 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.3, all party representatives and claims 20 adjusters for insured defendants with full and unlimited authority2 to negotiate and 21 22 1 If any party believes the MSC is more likely to be successful if conducted in-person, that 23 party shall meet and confer on the issue with the other parties. After meeting and conferring, and 24 no later than 60 days before the MSC, the parties shall leave a joint voicemail with chambers at (619) 557-6624 indicating which of the parties requests an in-person MSC. In the voicemail, the 25 parties shall leave three mutually available dates for a telephonic status conference to discuss whether the MSC should be held in-person. The final decision will be made by the Court. 26 2 “Full authority to settle” means that the individuals at the settlement conference must be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement terms 27 acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648 (7th Cir. enter into a binding settlement, as well as the principal attorney(s) responsible for 1 the litigation, must be present and legally and factually prepared to discuss and 2 resolve the case at the MSC. In the case of an entity, an authorized representative 3 of the entity who is not retained outside counsel must be present and must have 4 discretionary authority to commit the entity to pay an amount up to the amount of 5 the Plaintiff’s prayer (excluding punitive damages prayers). The purpose of this 6 requirement is to have representatives present who can settle the case during the 7 course of the conference without consulting a superior. 8 Counsel for a United States government entity may be excused from this 9 requirement so long as the government attorney who attends the MSC conference 10 (1) has primary responsibility for handling the case, and (2) may negotiate settlement 11 offers which the attorney is willing to recommend to the government official having 12 ultimate settlement authority. 13 Failure to attend the MSC or obtain proper excuse will be considered 14 grounds for sanctions. 15 10. No later than 21 days before the MSC, the parties shall exchange 16 formal settlement proposals, as required by § III.A. of Judge Burkhardt’s Civil 17 Chambers Rules. No later than 14 days before the MSC, the parties shall meet and 18 confer in person or telephonically, as required by § III.B. of Judge Burkhardt’s Civil 19 Chambers Rules. 20 11. No later than October 20, 2026, counsel (and any unrepresented 21 parties) shall lodge confidential MSC statements with Judge Burkhardt’s chambers 22 via e-mail at efile_Burkhardt@casd.uscourts.gov. The parties’ MSC statements 23 shall comply with § III.C. of Judge Burkhardt’s Civil Chambers Rules. 24 12. Counsel shall comply with the pre-trial disclosure requirements of Fed. 25 26 purpose of requiring a person with unlimited settlement authority to attend the conference includes 27 that the person’s view of the case may be altered during the face-to-face conference. Id. at 486. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) by February 10, 2027. Failure to comply with these disclosure 1 requirements could result in evidence preclusion or other sanctions under Fed. R. 2 Civ. P. 37. 3 13. Counsel shall meet and take the action required by Local Rule 16.1.f.4 4 by February 17, 2027. At this meeting, counsel shall discuss and attempt to enter 5 into stipulations and agreements resulting in simplification of the triable issues. 6 Counsel shall exchange copies and/or display all exhibits other than those to be used 7 for impeachment. The exhibits shall be prepared in accordance with Local Rule 8 16.1.f.4.c. Counsel shall note any objections they have to any other parties’ Pretrial 9 Disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3). Counsel shall cooperate in the 10 preparation of the proposed pretrial conference order. 11 14. Counsel for Plaintiff will be responsible for preparing the pretrial order 12 and arranging the meetings of counsel pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.1.f. By 13 February 24, 2027, Plaintiff’s counsel must provide opposing counsel with the 14 proposed pretrial order for review and approval. Opposing counsel must 15 communicate promptly with Plaintiff’s attorney concerning any objections to form 16 or content of the pretrial order, and both parties shall attempt promptly to resolve 17 their differences, if any, concerning the order. 18 15. The Proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order, including objections to 19 any other parties’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures shall be prepared, 20 served and lodged with the assigned district judge by March 3, 2027, and shall be 21 in the form prescribed in and comply with Local Rule 16.1.f.6. 22 16. The final Pretrial Conference is scheduled on the calendar of the 23 Honorable James E. Simmons on March 10, 2027 at 1:30 PM. 24 17. The parties must review the chambers’ rules for the assigned district 25 judge and magistrate judge. 26 18. A post trial settlement conference before a magistrate judge may be 27 19. The dates and times set forth herein will not be modified except for 5 good cause shown. 3 20. Plaintiff’s counsel shall serve a copy of this order on all parties that 4 || enter this case hereafter. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 Dated: April 22, 2026 bandit n. Jill L. Burkhardt 8 ited States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28