Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05923/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05923-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLAUDIA SANCHEZ, ERIN WALKER and

WILLIAM SMITH, as individuals and on behalf

of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

WELLS FARGO AND COMPANY, WELLS

FARGO BANK, N.A., and DOES 1 through 125,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-05923 WHA

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER,

REFERENCE TO MAGISTRATE

JUDGE FOR MEDIATION/

SETTLEMENT AND ORDER

LIFTING STAY

After a case management conference, the Court enters the following order pursuant to

Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) and Civil Local Rule 16-10:

1. The stay is LIFTED.

2. All initial disclosures under FRCP 26 must be completed by MARCH 21, 2008, on pain

of preclusion under FRCP 37(c). 

3. Leave to add any new parties or pleading amendments must be sought by

MARCH 21, 2008. 

4. The motion for class certification shall be filed by JULY 10, 2008, to be heard on a

35-day track. 

5. The non-expert discovery cut-off date shall be OCTOBER 17, 2008. 

6. The last date for designation of expert testimony and disclosure of full expert reports

under FRCP 26(a)(2) as to any issue on which a party has the burden of proof

Case 3:07-cv-05923-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/27/08 Page 1 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

(“opening reports”) shall be OCTOBER 17, 2008. Within FOURTEEN CALENDAR DAYS

thereafter, all other parties must disclose any responsive expert testimony with full

expert reports responsive to opening reports (“opposition reports”). Within

SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS thereafter, the opening parties must disclose any reply reports

rebutting specific material in opposition reports. Reply reports must be limited to true

rebuttal and should be very brief. They should not add new material that should have

been placed in the opening report. Without a reply report disclosure, no reply/rebuttal

expert testimony will ordinarily be allowed. The cutoff for all expert discovery shall be

FOURTEEN CALENDAR DAYS after the deadline for reply reports. In aid of preparing an

opposition or reply report, a responding party may depose the adverse expert

sufficiently before the deadline for the opposition or reply report so as to use the

testimony in preparing the response. Experts must make themselves readily available

for such depositions. Alternatively, the responding party can elect to depose the expert

later in the expert-discovery period. An expert, however, may be deposed only once

unless the expert is used for different opening and/or opposition reports, in which case

the expert may be deposed independently on the subject matter of each report. At least

28 CALENDAR DAYS before the due date for opening reports, each party shall serve a

list of issues on which it will offer any expert testimony in its case-in-chief (including

from non-retained experts). This is so that all parties will be timely able to obtain

counter-experts on the listed issues and to facilitate the timely completeness of all

expert reports. Failure to so disclose may result in preclusion. 

7. As to damages studies, the cut-off date for past damages will be as of the expert report

(or such earlier date as the expert may select). In addition, the experts may try to

project future damages (i.e., after the cut-off date) if the substantive standards for

future damages can be met. With timely leave of Court or by written stipulation, the

experts may update their reports (with supplemental reports) to a date closer to the time

of trial. 

Case 3:07-cv-05923-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/27/08 Page 2 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

8. At trial, the direct testimony of experts will be limited to the matters disclosed in their

reports. Omitted material may not ordinarily be added on direct examination. 

This means the reports must be complete and sufficiently detailed. 

Illustrative animations, diagrams, charts and models may be used on direct examination

only if they were part of the expert’s report, with the exception of simple drawings and

tabulations that plainly illustrate what is already in the report, which can be drawn by

the witness at trial or otherwise shown to the jury. If cross-examination fairly opens

the door, however, an expert may go beyond the written report on cross-examination

and/or redirect examination. By written stipulation, of course, all sides may relax these

requirements. 

9. To head off a recurring problem, experts lacking percipient knowledge should avoid

vouching for the credibility of witnesses, i.e., whose version of the facts in dispute is

correct. This means that they may not, for example, testify that based upon a review of

fact depositions and other material supplied by counsel, a police officer did (or did not)

violate standards. Rather, the expert should be asked for his or her opinion based —

explicitly — upon an assumed fact scenario. This will make clear that the witness is

not attempting to make credibility and fact findings and thereby to invade the province

of the jury. Of course, a qualified expert can testify to relevant customs, usages,

practices, recognized standards of conduct, and other specialized matters beyond the

ken of a lay jury. This subject is addressed further in the trial guidelines referenced in

paragraph 17 below. 

10. Counsel need not request a motion hearing date and may notice non-discovery motions

for any Thursday (excepting holidays) at 8:00 a.m. The Court sometimes rules on the

papers, issuing a written order and vacating the hearing. If a written request for oral

argument is filed before a ruling, stating that a lawyer of four or fewer years out of law

school will conduct the oral argument or at least the lion’s share, then the Court will

hear oral argument, believing that young lawyers need more opportunities for

appearances than they usually receive. 

Case 3:07-cv-05923-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/27/08 Page 3 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

11. The last date to file dispositive motions shall be NOVEMBER 20, 2008. No dispositive

motions shall be heard more than 35 days after this deadline, i.e., if any party waits

until the last day to file, then the parties must adhere to the 35-day track in order to

avoid pressure on the trial date. 

12. The FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE shall be at 2:00 P.M. on JANUARY 26, 2009. 

For the form of submissions for the final pretrial conference and trial, please see

paragraph 17 below. 

13. A JURY/BENCH TRIAL shall begin on FEBRUARY 9, 2009, at 7:30 A.M., in Courtroom 9,

19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, 94102. The trial

schedule and time limits shall be set at the final pretrial conference. Although almost

all trials proceed on the date scheduled, it may be necessary on occasion for a case to

trail, meaning the trial may commence a few days or even a few weeks after the date

stated above, due to calendar congestion and the need to give priority to criminal trials. 

Counsel and the parties should plan accordingly, including advising witnesses. 

14. Counsel may not stipulate around the foregoing dates without Court approval. 

15. While the Court encourages the parties to engage in settlement discussions, please do

not ask for any extensions on the ground of settlement discussions or on the ground that

the parties experienced delays in scheduling settlement conferences, mediation or ENE. 

The parties should proceed to prepare their cases for trial. No continuance (even if

stipulated) shall be granted on the ground of incomplete preparation without competent

and detailed declarations setting forth good cause. 

16. To avoid any misunderstanding with respect to the final pretrial conference and trial,

the Court wishes to emphasize that all filings and appearances must be made — on pain

of dismissal, default or other sanction — unless and until a dismissal fully resolving the

case is received. It will not be enough to inform the clerk that a settlement in principle

has been reached or to lodge a partially executed settlement agreement or to lodge a

fully executed agreement (or dismissal) that resolves less than the entire case. 

Where, however, a fully-executed settlement agreement clearly and fully disposing of

Case 3:07-cv-05923-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/27/08 Page 4 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5

the entire case is lodged reasonably in advance of the pretrial conference or trial and

only a ministerial act remains, the Court will arrange a telephone conference to work

out an alternate procedure pending a formal dismissal. 

17. If you have not already done so, please read and follow the “Supplemental Order to

Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference in Civil Cases Before Judge

William Alsup” and other orders issued by the Clerk’s office when this action was

commenced. Among other things, the supplemental order explains when submissions

are to go to the Clerk’s Office (the general rule) versus when submissions may go

directly to chambers (rarely). With respect to the final pretrial conference and trial,

please read and follow the “Guidelines For Trial and Final Pretrial Conference in Civil

[Jury/Bench] Cases Before The Honorable William Alsup.” All orders and guidelines

referenced in the paragraph are available on the district court’s website at

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov. The website also includes other guidelines for

attorney’s fees motions and the necessary form of attorney time records for cases

before Judge Alsup. If you do not have access to the Internet, you may contact Deputy

Clerk Dawn K. Toland at (415) 522-2020 to learn how to pick up a hard copy. 

18. All pretrial disclosures under FRCP 26(a)(3) and objections required by FRCP 26(a)(3)

must be made on the schedule established by said rule. 

19. This matter is hereby REFERRED to MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOSEPH C. SPERO for

MEDIATION/SETTLEMENT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 27, 2008. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-05923-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/27/08 Page 5 of 5