Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00286/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00286-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD MOORE,

Plaintiff,

v.

OFFICE DEPOT, INC., 

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:10-cv-0286 OWW SKO

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER 

Discovery Cut-Off: 3/30/11

Non-Dispositive Motion

Filing Deadline: 4/15/11

Non-Dispositive Motion

Hearing Date: 5/20/11 9:00

Ctrm. 8

Dispositive Motion Filing

Deadline: 4/29/11

Dispositive Motion Hearing

Date: 6/6/11 10:00 Ctrm. 3

Settlement Conference Date:

4/6/11 11:00 Ctrm. 8

Pre-Trial Conference Date:

7/11/11 11:00 Ctrm. 3

Trial Date: 8/23/11 9:00

Ctrm. 3 (JT-5 days)

I. Date of Scheduling Conference.

July 23, 2010.

II. Appearances Of Counsel.

Moore Law Firm, P.C. by Tanya Levinson Moore, Esq., appeared

on behalf of Plaintiff. 

1

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 1 of 10
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

Weston Herzog LLP by Jonathon J. Herzog, Esq., appeared on

behalf of Defendant.

III. Summary of Pleadings. 

1. This is a civil rights action by Plaintiff Ronald Moore

for discrimination at the building, structure, facility, complex,

property, land, development, and/or surrounding business complex

known as: Office Depot Store, located at 2736 E. Divisadero

Street, Fresno, California 93721. Moore seeks damages,

injunctive and declaratory relief, attorney fees and costs,

against Office Depot, Inc. 

2. Defendant Office Depot, Inc. denies any intentional

discrimination and is in the process of investigating the

allegations of noncompliance set forth in Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

IV. Orders Re Amendments To Pleadings.

1. The caption of the Complaint has been amended to delete

any Defendants except Office Depot, Inc. The parties do not

anticipate amending the pleadings at this time. The deadline for

any amendments to pleadings shall be October 1, 2010, absent good

cause shown for later amendment. 

V. Factual Summary.

A. Admitted Facts Which Are Deemed Proven Without Further

Proceedings. 

1. Defendant Office Depot, Inc. is a corporation

licensed to do and doing business in the State of California. 

2. Office Depot operates and leases the store at

issue. 

3. The store is a public accommodation facility open

to the public, intended for nonresidential use and whose

2

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 2 of 10
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

operation affects commerce. 

B. Contested Facts.

1. All remaining facts are disputed, including

whether Defendant has complied with Federal and State statutes

and the feasibility of corrections of any non-compliance items. 

2. There is no dispute over liability between

landlord and tenant. 

VI. Legal Issues.

A. Uncontested.

1. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343

and 1367. 

2. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c).

3. Federal jurisdiction also exists under 28 U.S.C.

§§ 2201 and 2202. 

4. The parties agree that for supplemental claims,

the substantive law of the State of California provides the rule

of decision. 

B. Contested. 

1. All remaining legal issues are disputed. 

VII. Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction.

1. The parties have not consented to transfer the 

case to the Magistrate Judge for all purposes, including trial.

VIII. Corporate Identification Statement.

1. Any nongovernmental corporate party to any action in

this court shall file a statement identifying all its parent

corporations and listing any entity that owns 10% or more of the

party's equity securities. A party shall file the statement with

its initial pleading filed in this court and shall supplement the

3

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 3 of 10
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

statement within a reasonable time of any change in the

information. 

IX. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date.

A. Changes in Timing.

Parties do not request any changes in the timing, form,

or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a). 

B. Cut-Off Date for Non-Expert Discovery.

Parties propose a discovery cut-off date of January

2011. 

C. Suggested Timing of the Disclosure of Expert Witnesses

as Required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2). 

Parties propose expert disclosures take place in

February 2001, or at the convenience of the Court. 

D. Suggested Timing of the Disclosure of Expert Witness

Discovery as Required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2). 

Parties request that any expert exchange be

simultaneous between all parties ninety (90) days prior to the

close of discovery, with supplemental disclosures thirty (30)

days later. 

E. Changes in the Limits on Discovery.

Parties do not request changes to the limitations on

discovery, aside from those imposed by FRCP and local rules.

F. Protective Order Relating to the Discovery of

Information.

Parties do not anticipate at this time that such

protective order will be required.

G. Timing, Sequencing, Phasing or Scheduling of Discovery.

Parties do not seek a timetable for discovery outside

4

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 4 of 10
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

of the Court’s Scheduling Order. Parties do not believe

discovery should be conducted in phases or limited to particular

issues. 

H. Discovery Outside of the U.S.

Parties do not anticipate the need to take discovery

outside the United States. 

I. Video and/or Sound Recording of Depositions.

Parties anticipate that all depositions will be

videotaped. 

J. Mid-Discovery Status Report and Conference.

Parties propose a date in March of 2011 for status

report and conference. 

K. Discovery Relating to Electronic, Digital and/or

Magnetic Data. 

Parties do not anticipate at this time that such

discovery will be required. 

L. The Court orders:

1. The parties are ordered to complete all discovery

on or before March 30, 2011.

2. The parties are directed to disclose all expert

witnesses, in writing, on or before January 31, 2011. Any

rebuttal or supplemental expert disclosures will be made on or

before February 28, 2011. The parties will comply with the

provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) regarding

their expert designations. Local Rule 16-240(a) notwithstanding,

the written designation of experts shall be made pursuant to F.

R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A) and (B) and shall include all

information required thereunder. Failure to designate experts in

5

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 5 of 10
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

compliance with this order may result in the Court excluding the

testimony or other evidence offered through such experts that are

not disclosed pursuant to this order.

3. The provisions of F. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) shall 

apply to all discovery relating to experts and their opinions. 

Experts may be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and

opinions included in the designation. Failure to comply will

result in the imposition of sanctions. 

X. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule.

1. All Non-Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions, including any

discovery motions, will be filed on or before April 15, 2011, and

heard on May 20, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. before Magistrate Judge

Sheila K. Oberto in Courtroom 8. 

2. In scheduling such motions, the Magistrate

Judge may grant applications for an order shortening time

pursuant to Local Rule 142(d). However, if counsel does not

obtain an order shortening time, the notice of motion must comply

with Local Rule 251. 

3. All Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions are to be

filed no later than April 29, 2011, and will be heard on June 6,

2011, at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable Oliver W. Wanger, United

States District Judge, in Courtroom 3, 7th Floor. In scheduling

such motions, counsel shall comply with Local Rule 230. 

XI. Pre-Trial Conference Date.

1. July 11, 2011, at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3, 7th Floor,

before the Honorable Oliver W. Wanger, United States District

Judge. 

2. The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pre6

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 6 of 10
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

Trial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2). 

3. Counsel's attention is directed to Rules 281 

and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District

of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for

the pre-trial conference. The Court will insist upon strict

compliance with those rules.

XII. Motions - Hard Copy.

1. The parties shall submit one (1) courtesy paper copy to

the Court of any motions filed. Exhibits shall be marked with

protruding numbered or lettered tabs so that the Court can easily

identify such exhibits. 

XIII. Trial Date.

1. August 23, 2011, at the hour of 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom

3, 7th Floor, before the Honorable Oliver W. Wanger, United

States District Judge. 

2. This is a jury trial.

3. Counsels' Estimate Of Trial Time:

a. 5 days.

4. Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules

of Practice for the Eastern District of California, Rule 285. 

XIV. Settlement Conference.

1. A Settlement Conference is scheduled for April 6, 2011,

at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 8 before the Honorable Sheila K.

Oberto, United States Magistrate Judge. If the parties desire an

earlier settlement conference, they may contact the Courtroom

Deputy for Magistrate Judge Oberto and an earlier settlement

conference date shall be assigned. 

2. Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the

7

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 7 of 10
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

Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall appear at the

Settlement Conference with the parties and the person or persons

having full authority to negotiate and settle the case on any

terms at the conference. 

3. Permission for a party [not attorney] to attend

by telephone may be granted upon request, by letter, with a copy

to the other parties, if the party [not attorney] lives and works

outside the Eastern District of California, and attendance in

person would constitute a hardship. If telephone attendance is

allowed, the party must be immediately available throughout the

conference until excused regardless of time zone differences. 

Any other special arrangements desired in cases where settlement

authority rests with a governing body, shall also be proposed in

advance by letter copied to all other parties. 

4. Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. 

At least five (5) days prior to the Settlement Conference the

parties shall submit, directly to the Magistrate Judge's

chambers, a confidential settlement conference statement. The

statement should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor

served on any other party. Each statement shall be clearly

marked "confidential" with the date and time of the Settlement

Conference indicated prominently thereon. Counsel are urged to

request the return of their statements if settlement is not

achieved and if such a request is not made the Court will dispose

of the statement.

5. The Confidential Settlement Conference

Statement shall include the following: 

a. A brief statement of the facts of the 

8

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 8 of 10
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

case.

b. A brief statement of the claims and 

defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon which the claims

are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties' likelihood

of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of

the major issues in dispute.

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

d. An estimate of the cost and time to be

expended for further discovery, pre-trial and trial.

e. The relief sought.

f. The parties' position on settlement,

including present demands and offers and a history of past

settlement discussions, offers and demands. 

XV. Request For Bifurcation, Appointment Of Special Master, 

Or Other Techniques To Shorten Trial. 

1. None. 

XVI. Related Matters Pending.

1. There are no related matters.

XVII. Compliance With Federal Procedure.

1. The Court requires compliance with the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the

Eastern District of California. To aid the court in the

efficient administration of this case, all counsel are directed

to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District

of California, and keep abreast of any amendments thereto.

XVIII. Effect Of This Order.

1. The foregoing order represents the best

9

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 9 of 10
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

estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most suitable

to bring this case to resolution. The trial date reserved is

specifically reserved for this case. If the parties determine at

any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met,

counsel are ordered to notify the court immediately of that fact

so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by

subsequent scheduling conference. 

2. Stipulations extending the deadlines contained

herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by

affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached

exhibits, which establish good cause for granting the relief

requested. 

3. Failure to comply with this order may result in

the imposition of sanctions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 23, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10

Case 1:10-cv-00286-OWW -SKO Document 19 Filed 07/23/10 Page 10 of 10