Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-01302/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-01302-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VICENTE ARRAIGA ALVAREZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

DR. S. KO, M.D., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 16-CV-1302-CAB-NLS

ORDER 

(1) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 

EX PARTE APPLICATION 

TO AMEND THE COURT’S 

SCHEDULING ORDER [ECF 

No. 69]; 

(2) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION TO COMPEL AS 

MOOT [ECF No. 67]; and

(3) ISSUEING FIRST 

AMENDED SCHEDULING 

ORDER

Pending before the Court are two motions: (1) Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel 

Responses to Interrogatories, ECF No. 67, and (2) Defendants’ ex parte application 

to amend the Scheduling Order, ECF No. 69. 

In response to the Plaintiff’s motion to compel, the Court ordered the parties 

to meet and confer regarding the substance of the motion. ECF No. 68. The 

Defendants’ ex parte application represents the parties completed that meet and 

confer on November 1, 2017. As represented in that application, following a 

telephonic meet and confer, Defendants agreed to respond to additional 

Case 3:16-cv-01302-CAB-NLS Document 70 Filed 11/03/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 5
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

interrogatories beyond the twenty-five authorized under Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a)(1). 

Defendants are ORDERED to serve responses to the specifically agreed upon 

interrogatories on or before December 4, 2017. Further, Plaintiff agreed to provide 

responses to Defendants’ Interrogatories (Set One) that have not yet been served. 

Plaintiff is ORDERED to serve those responses on or before November 6, 2017. 

In light of the agreements of the parties which are now orders of the Court, the 

Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff’s motion to compel. ECF No. 67. 

During the meet and confer process, the Defendants represent that the parties

agreed to request the Court modify the Scheduling Order. Given the resolution of

the discovery issues and time requested for same, the Court finds good cause to 

amend the Scheduling Order (ECF No. 41) as follows:

5. All fact discovery shall be completed by all parties by December 4, 2017. 

“Completed” means that all discovery under Rules 30-36 of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be 

initiated a sufficient period of time in advance of the cut-off date, so that it 

may be completed by the cut-off date, taking into account the times for 

service, notice and response as set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure. Counsel shall promptly and in good faith meet and confer 

with regard to all discovery disputes in compliance with Local Rule 

26.1(a). The Court expects counsel to make every effort to resolve all 

disputes without court intervention through the meet and confer process. If 

the parties reach an impasse on any discovery issue, counsel shall file an 

appropriate motion within the time limit and procedures outlined in the 

undersigned magistrate judge’s chambers rules. A failure to comply in 

this regard will result in a waiver of a party’s discovery issue. Absent 

an order of the court, no stipulation continuing or altering this 

requirement will be recognized by the court. 

6. All expert discovery shall be completed by all parties by December 4, 

2017. The parties shall comply with the same procedures set forth in the 

paragraph governing fact discovery. 

///

///

Case 3:16-cv-01302-CAB-NLS Document 70 Filed 11/03/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 5
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

7. All pre-trial motions, other than Daubert motions, motions to amend or join 

parties, or motions in limine, shall be filed on or before January 8, 2018. 

All Daubert motions shall be filed on or before January 8, 2018. Counsel 

for the moving party shall set the motion date on the date that is 35 days 

from the date the motion is filed. Parties intending to file a motion shall not 

contact Judge Bencivengo’s chambers for a hearing date. The parties 

should review Judge Bencivengo’s chambers rules for civil cases for the 

additional requirements for noticed motions before Judge Bencivengo. 

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1.f.3.c, if an opposing party fails to file opposition 

papers in the time and manner required by Local Rule 7.1.e.2, that failure 

may constitute a consent to the granting of a motion or other request for 

ruling by the Court. Accordingly, all parties are ordered to abide by the 

terms of Local Rule 7.1.e.2 or otherwise face the prospect of any pretrial 

motion being granted as an unopposed motion pursuant to Local Rule 

7.1.f.3.c. 

8. A telephonic Mandatory Settlement Conference shall be conducted on 

February 26, 2018 at 3:30 p.m. in the chambers of Magistrate Judge Nita 

L. Stormes. Counsel shall lodge confidential settlement briefs directly to 

chambers by February 19, 2018. All parties are ordered to read and to 

fully comply with the Chamber Rules of the assigned magistrate judge. 

9. If Plaintiff is incarcerated in a penal institution or other facility, the 

Plaintiff’s presence is not required at conferences before Magistrate Judge 

Nita L. Stormes, and the Plaintiff may appear by telephone. In that case, 

defense counsel is to coordinate the Plaintiff’s appearance by telephone. 

10. The parties must comply with the pretrial disclosure requirements of Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) no later than March 9, 2018. Please be advised that 

failure to comply with this section or any other discovery order of the 

Court may result in the sanctions provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, 

including a prohibition on the introduction of experts or other 

designated matters in evidence. 

11. In jury trial cases before the Honorable Cathy Ann Bencivengo, neither 

party is required to file Memoranda of Contentions of Fact and Law 

pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.1.f.2. 

Case 3:16-cv-01302-CAB-NLS Document 70 Filed 11/03/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 5
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

12. Counsel shall confer and take the action required by Local Rule 16.1.f.4.a 

on or before March 16, 2017. The parties shall meet and confer and 

prepare a proposed pretrial order containing the following: 

1. A joint neutral statement to be read to the jury, not in excess of one 

page, of the nature of the case and the claims and defenses.

2. A list of the causes of action to be tried, referenced to the Complaint 

[and Counterclaim if applicable]. For each cause of action, the order 

shall succinctly list the elements of the claim, damages and any 

defenses. A cause of action in the Complaint [and/or Counterclaim] 

which is not listed shall be dismissed with prejudice. 

3(a). A list of each witness counsel actually expect to call at trial with a 

brief statement, not exceeding four sentences, of the substance of the 

witnesses’ testimony. 

3(b). A list of each expert witness counsel actually expect to call at trial 

with a brief statement, not exceeding four sentences, of the substance 

of the witnesses’ testimony. 

3(c). A list of additional witnesses, including experts, counsel do not expect 

to call at this time but reserve the right to call at trial along with a 

brief statement, not exceeding four sentences, of the substance of the 

witnesses’ testimony. 

4(a). A list of all exhibits that counsel actually expect to offer at trial with a 

one-sentence description of the exhibit. All exhibits are to be 

identified numerically, plaintiff starting with “1” and defendant 

beginning with an agreed upon numerical designation. 

4(b). A list of all other exhibits that counsel do not expect to offer at this 

time but reserve the right to offer if necessary at trial with a onesentence description of the exhibit. 

5. A statement of all facts to which the parties stipulate. This statement 

shall be on a separate page and will be read to and provided to the 

jury. 

6. A list of all deposition transcripts by page and line, or videotape 

depositions by section, that will be offered at trial. 

7. Counsel will note any objections they have to any other parties’ Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures.

The Court encourages the parties to consult with the assigned magistrate 

judge to work out any problems in preparation of the proposed pretrial 

order. The court will entertain any questions concerning the conduct of the 

trial at the pretrial conference.

Case 3:16-cv-01302-CAB-NLS Document 70 Filed 11/03/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 5
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

13. Counsel for the Plaintiff must provide opposing counsel with the proposed 

pretrial order for review and approval and take any other action required by 

Local Rule 16.1.f.6.a on or before March 23, 2018. Opposing counsel 

must communicate promptly with plaintiff’s attorney concerning any 

objections to form or content of the pretrial order, and both parties shall 

attempt promptly to resolve their differences, if any, concerning the order.

14. The proposed pretrial order shall be lodged with the district judge’s 

chambers on or before March 30, 2018, and shall be in the form prescribed 

in Local Rule 16.1.f.6. 

15. The final Pretrial Conference is scheduled on the calendar of the 

Honorable Cathy Ann Bencivengo for April 6, 2018, at 2:00 p.m.

16. The trial in this matter shall commence on Monday, May 11, 2018, at 8:45 

a.m. 

All provisions of the Scheduling Order not amended above shall remain 

unchanged.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 3, 2017

Case 3:16-cv-01302-CAB-NLS Document 70 Filed 11/03/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 5