Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01004/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01004-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:2671 Federal Tort Claims Act

---

1

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

On December 4, 2015, the Court held an informal telephonic conference regarding a 

discovery dispute. The Court learned that Plaintiff had failed to make her expert disclosure until 

November 30, 2015 and had not provided reports required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2).1 Plaintiff’s 

counsel, Mr. McMahan, indicated that the reports would be provided via e-mail to Defendant’s 

 

1 The Rule requires, 

Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, this disclosure must be accompanied by a written report--

prepared and signed by the witness--if the witness is one retained or specially employed to provide expert 

testimony in the case or one whose duties as the party's employee regularly involve giving expert testimony. 

The report must contain:

(i) a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them;

(ii) the facts or data considered by the witness in forming them;

(iii) any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them;

(iv) the witness's qualifications, including a list of all publications authored in the previous 10 years;

(v) a list of all other cases in which, during the previous 4 years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or 

by deposition; and

(vi) a statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2).

EMELIN BRAVO, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01004 DAD JLT

ORDER AFTER INFORMAL TELEPHONIC 

CONFERENCE RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTE

(Doc. 27)

Case 1:14-cv-01004-DAD-JLT Document 30 Filed 12/04/15 Page 1 of 2
2

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

counsel, Mr. Lodge, no later than December 11, 2015. However, this left Defendant’s expert 

insufficient time to prepare his report, which is now due on December 18, 2015. Thus, after further 

discussion, the parties came to an agreement to resolve the dispute. Notably, this agreement includes 

Plaintiff’s express agreement that she will not disclose or seek to disclose any rebuttal experts. 

Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. Plaintiff SHALL provide the expert reports—that fully comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 

26(a)(2)—to Mr. Lodge via e-mail no later than 5:00 p.m., December 11, 2015:

2. Defendant SHALL make its expert disclosure no later than January 12, 2016;

3. All expert discovery SHALL be completed no later than February 26, 2016;

4. Any non-dispositive motions SHALL be filed no later than March 4, 2016 and heard 

no later than March 25, 2016.

Absolutely no other modifications to the case schedule are authorized.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 4, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01004-DAD-JLT Document 30 Filed 12/04/15 Page 2 of 2