Moran v. FCA US LLC
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Allison H. Goddard (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint motion seeking a 90-day extension of the remaining scheduling order deadlines due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The court granted the motion, finding good cause, and issued an amended scheduling order with new deadlines for class certification, expert discovery, and pretrial proceedings.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting the joint motion for a 90-day extension of the scheduling order deadlines.“the Court finds good cause to GRANT the Motion.” | agree with court The court applied the 'good cause' standard required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and cited the Ninth Circuit's decision in Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc. to support the focus on party diligence. The order notes this is the second extension requested due to the pandemic and references a previous extension granted for the same reasons. While the order does not explicitly detail the specific diligence efforts of the parties in this instance, it relies on the prior finding and the status conference discussion. Given the extraordinary circumstances of the pandemic and the prior extension, the decision to grant the motion is consistent with the law and the recited record. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the applicable legal standard (Rule 16(b)(4)) and the controlling circuit precedent (Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.) for modifying scheduling orders. It applies this standard to the facts presented (joint motion, pandemic impact, prior extension). The reasoning is concise but sufficient for a procedural order granting a joint motion based on good cause.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALFONSO and ARLENE MORAN, Case No.: 3:17-cv-02594-GPC-AHG individually and on behalf of a class of 12 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER similarly situated individuals, AND ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 Plaintiffs, MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE 14 v. 15 [ECF No. 70] 16 FCA US LLC, 17 Defendant. 18 19 On May 29, 2020, the parties filed a joint motion seeking a 90-day extension of the 20 remaining Scheduling Order deadlines in this case. ECF No. 70. 21 The Court may modify the scheduling order only for good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 22 16(b)(4). In determining whether the parties have met the “good cause” standard, the Court 23 primarily considers their diligence in conducting discovery thus far. Johnson v. Mammoth 24 Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). That is, the Court may modify the 25 pretrial schedule “if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking 26 the extension.” Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee’s notes (1983 27 amendment)). 28 1 This is the second request to amend the Scheduling Order that the parties have filed 2 due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. See ECF No. 68. The Court previously granted 3 a 60-day extension of the Scheduling Order deadlines on April 7, 2020, for the same 4 reasons given in support of the instant motion. ECF No. 69. Therefore, the Court held a 5 Status Conference with the parties on June 11, 2020, to discuss the newest requested 6 extension. ECF No. 72. Having reviewed the parties’ Joint Motion (ECF No. 70), and 7 having further discussed the Court’s expectations of the parties moving forward during the 8 Status Conference, the Court finds good cause to GRANT the Motion. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 10 1. The deadline to file a class certification motion is September 15, 2020. 11 2. By October 19, 2020, each party shall comply with the disclosure provisions 12 in Rule 26(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This disclosure 13 requirement applies to all persons retained or specially employed to provide expert 14 testimony, or whose duties as an employee of the party regularly involve the giving of 15 expert testimony. Except as provided in the paragraph below, any party that fails to 16 make these disclosures shall not, absent substantial justification, be permitted to use 17 evidence or testimony not disclosed at any hearing or at the time of trial. In addition, 18 the Court may impose sanctions as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c). 19 3. Any party shall supplement its disclosure regarding contradictory or rebuttal 20 evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) and 26(e) by November 2, 2020. 21 4. All expert discovery shall be completed by all parties by November 30, 2020. 22 The parties shall comply with the same procedures set forth in the paragraph governing 23 fact discovery. Failure to comply with this section or any other discovery order of the court 24 may result in the sanctions provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, including a prohibition on 25 the introduction of experts or other designated matters in evidence. 26 5. All other pretrial motions, including those addressing Daubert issues related 27 to dispositive motions must be filed by January 8, 2021. Pursuant to Honorable Gonzalo 28 P. Curiel’s Civil Pretrial & Trial Procedures, all motions for summary judgment shall be 1 accompanied by a separate statement of undisputed material facts. Any opposition to a 2 summary judgment motion shall include a response to the separate statement of undisputed 3 material facts. Counsel for the moving party must obtain a motion hearing date from the 4 law clerk of the judge who will hear the motion. Motion papers MUST be filed and served 5 the same day of obtaining a motion hearing date from chambers. A briefing schedule will 6 be issued once a motion has been filed. The period of time between the date you request a 7 motion date and the hearing date may vary. Please plan accordingly. Failure to make a 8 timely request for a motion date may result in the motion not being heard. 9 6. Pursuant to Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel’s Civil Pretrial & Trial Procedures, 10 the parties are excused from the requirement of Local Rule 16.1(f)(2)(a); no Memoranda 11 of Law or Contentions of Fact are to be filed. 12 7. Counsel shall comply with the pre-trial disclosure requirements of Fed. R. 13 Civ. P. 26(a)(3) by March 23, 2021. Failure to comply with these disclosure requirements 14 could result in evidence preclusion or other sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37. 15 8. Counsel shall meet and take the action required by Local Rule 16.1(f)(4) by 16 April 5, 2021. At this meeting, counsel shall discuss and attempt to enter into stipulations 17 and agreements resulting in simplification of the triable issues. Counsel shall exchange 18 copies and/or display all exhibits other than those to be used for impeachment. The exhibits 19 shall be prepared in accordance with Local Rule 16.1(f)(4)(c). Counsel shall note any 20 objections they have to any other parties’ Pretrial Disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 26(a)(3). Counsel shall cooperate in the preparation of the proposed pretrial conference 22 order. 23 9. Counsel for plaintiff will be responsible for preparing the pretrial order and 24 arranging the meetings of counsel pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.1(f). By 25 April 12, 2021, plaintiff’s counsel must provide opposing counsel with the proposed 26 pretrial order for review and approval. Opposing counsel must communicate promptly with 27 plaintiff’s attorney concerning any objections to form or content of the pretrial order, and 28 both parties shall attempt promptly to resolve their differences, if any, concerning the order. 1 10. The Proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order, including objections to any 2 || other parties’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures shall be prepared, served and 3 ||lodged with the assigned district judge by April 19, 2021, and shall be in the form 4 || prescribed in and comply with Local Rule 16.1(f)(6). 5 11. The final Pretrial Conference is scheduled on the calendar of the Honorable 6 Gonzalo P. Curiel on April 26, 2021 at 1:30 pm. The Court will set a trial date during the 7 || pretrial conference. The Court will also schedule a motion in limine hearing date during 8 pretrial conference. 9 12. The parties must review the chambers’ rules for the assigned district judge 10 || and magistrate judge. 11 13. A post trial settlement conference before a magistrate judge may be held 12 || within 30 days of verdict in the case. 13 14. The dates and times set forth herein will not be modified except for good cause 14 || shown. 15 15. Briefs or memoranda in support of or in opposition to all motions noticed for 16 same motion day shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length, per party, without 17 || leave of the judge who will hear the motion. No reply memorandum shall exceed ten (10) 18 || pages without leave of a district court judge. Briefs and memoranda exceeding ten (10) 19 || pages in length shall have a table of contents and a table of authorities cited. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 ||Dated: June 12, 2020 03 _ArwiorwH. Xyolard Honorable Allison H. Goddard 24 United States Magistrate Judge 25 26 27 28