Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-00959/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-00959-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

1 

16-cv-00959-GPC (DHB) 

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DUNCAN LINDSEY, 

Plaintiff,

v. 

ELSEVIER INC., et al., 

Defendants.

 Case No.: 16-cv-00959-GPC (DHB) 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 

DENYING IN PART JOINT 

MOTION RE DISCOVERY AND 

OTHER PRETRIAL PROCEEDINGS

(ECF No. 39) 

On May 15, 2017, the parties filed a Joint Motion Re: Discovery and Other Pretrial 

Proceedings, seeking to extend the deadlines set forth in the Amended Scheduling Order 

by approximately three to six months. (ECF No. 39.) After review of the Joint Motion, 

the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the Joint Motion. The Court only 

finds good cause to extend certain deadlines by approximately one (1) month. 

Accordingly, the Amended Scheduling Order (ECF No. 38) is amended as follows: 

1. The parties shall designate their respective experts in writing by June 26, 

2017. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(A), the parties must identify any person who 

may be used at trial to present evidence pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Fed. R. 

Evid. This requirement is not limited to retained experts. The written designations shall 

Case 3:16-cv-00959-GPC-DHB Document 40 Filed 05/22/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 4
2 

16-cv-00959-GPC (DHB) 

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

include the name, address and telephone number of the expert and a reasonable summary 

of the testimony the expert is expected to provide. The list shall also include the normal 

rates the expert charges for deposition and trial testimony. The parties must disclose the 

identity of any rebuttal experts on or before July 10, 2017. 

2. By August 14, 2017, each party shall comply with the disclosure provisions 

in Rule 26(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This disclosure 

requirement applies to all persons retained or specially employed to provide expert 

testimony, or whose duties as an employee of the party regularly involve the giving of 

expert testimony. Except as provided in the paragraph below, any party that fails to 

make these disclosures shall not, absent substantial justification, be permitted to use 

evidence or testimony not disclosed at any hearing or at the time of trial. In addition, 

the Court may impose sanctions as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c).

3. Any party shall supplement its disclosure regarding contradictory or rebuttal 

evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) and 26(e) by September 18, 2017. 

4. All discovery shall be completed by all parties by October 23, 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 joint motion within the time limit and according to 

the procedures outlined in Magistrate Judge David H. Bartick’s Civil Chambers Rules, 

which are posted on the Court’s website. 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.

Case 3:16-cv-00959-GPC-DHB Document 40 Filed 05/22/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 4
3 

16-cv-00959-GPC (DHB) 

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. Please be advised that failure to comply with any 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. 

6. All pretrial motions, including those addressing Daubert issues related to 

dispositive motions must be filed by November 27, 2017. Pursuant to Honorable Gonzalo 

P. Curiel’s Civil Pretrial & Trial Procedures, all motions for summary judgment shall be 

accompanied by a separate statement of undisputed material facts. Any opposition to a 

summary judgment motion shall include a response to the separate statement of undisputed 

material facts. Counsel for the moving party must obtain a motion hearing date from the 

law clerk of the judge who will hear the motion. Motion papers MUST be filed and served 

the same day of obtaining a motion hearing date from chambers. A briefing schedule will 

be issued once a motion has been filed. The period of time between the date you request a 

motion date and the hearing date may vary. Please plan accordingly. Failure to make a 

timely request for a motion date may result in the motion not being heard. 

7. A Mandatory Settlement Conference shall be conducted on February 7, 2018

at 10:00 a.m. in the chambers of Magistrate Judge David H. Bartick. Counsel shall submit 

settlement statements directly to Judge Bartick’s chambers by January 31, 2018.

1

 The 

parties may either submit confidential settlement statements or may exchange their 

settlement statements. Each party’s settlement statement shall set forth the party’s 

statement of the case, identify controlling legal issues, concisely set out issues of liability 

and damages, and shall set forth the party’s settlement position, including the last offer or 

demand made by that party, and a separate statement of the offer or demand the party is 

prepared to make at the settlement conference. The settlement conference briefs shall 

not be filed with the Clerk of the Court. 

                                               

1

 Statements under 20 pages in length, including attachments and exhibits, shall 

be e-mailed to chambers at efile_Bartick@casd.uscourts.gov. Statements exceeding 20 

pages in length, including attachments and exhibits, must be delivered directly to chambers. 

Case 3:16-cv-00959-GPC-DHB Document 40 Filed 05/22/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 4
4 

16-cv-00959-GPC (DHB) 

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

All named parties, all counsel, and any other person(s) whose authority is 

required to negotiate and enter into settlement shall appear in person at the 

conference. The individual(s) present at the Mandatory Settlement Conference with 

settlement authority must have the unfettered discretion and authority on behalf of the party 

to: 1) fully explore all settlement options and to agree during the Mandatory Settlement 

Conference to any settlement terms acceptable to the party (G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. 

v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989)), 2) change the settlement position 

of a party during the course of the Mandatory Settlement Conference (Pitman v. Brinker 

Int’l, Inc., 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-86 (D. Ariz. 2003)), and 3) negotiate a settlement without 

being restricted by any predetermined level of authority (Nick v. Morgan’s Foods, Inc., 

270 F.3d 590, 596 (8th Cir. 2001)). 

Governmental entities may appear through litigation counsel only. As to all other 

parties, appearance by litigation counsel only is not acceptable. Retained outside corporate 

counsel shall not appear on behalf of a corporation as the party who has the authority to 

negotiate and enter into a settlement. The failure of any counsel, party or authorized 

person to appear at the Mandatory Settlement Conference as required shall be cause 

for the immediate imposition of sanctions. All conference discussions will be informal, 

off the record, privileged, and confidential. 

8. All other deadlines in the Amended Scheduling Order (ECF No. 38) remain 

in effect. 

9. The parties are advised that the Court will not grant any further extension of 

these deadlines. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 22, 2017 

 _________________________ 

DAVID H. BARTICK 

 United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:16-cv-00959-GPC-DHB Document 40 Filed 05/22/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 4