Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-02178/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-02178-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983bv Bivens Non-Prisoner

---

1 18cv2178-BEN (MSB)

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAREY L. JOHNSON, 

Plaintiff,

 vs.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 18cv2178-BEN (MSB)

ORDER DENYING JOINT 

MOTION TO STAY 

DEPOSITIONS AND GRANTING 

JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND 

CASE MANAGEMENT 

DEADLINES 

[ECF NO. 46]

The parties filed their “Joint Motion (1) for 60-Day Stay on Depositions and 

(2) for 60-Day Addition to all Case Management Deadlines Due to Covid-19 

Public Health Emergency,” (“Joint Motion”) on April 6, 2020. (ECF No. 46.) In 

the Joint Motion, they ask the Court to stay all depositions and continue the

remaining case management deadlines by sixty days because “[t]he current health 

crisis makes it well-nigh impossible for the Parties to reasonably prepare for and 

conduct depositions, and – as a consequence – to timely complete other 

professional functions (such as obtaining expert reports, themselves often 

Case 3:18-cv-02178-BEN-MSB Document 48 Filed 04/07/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 4
2 18cv2178-BEN (MSB)

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

dependent on the facts established at depositions) necessary to comply with the 

current case management/scheduling order in this matter.” (Id. at 2.)

In the first place, the Court notes that there are no deposition dates that have 

been set by the Court, and the Court is not aware of the dates the parties have 

scheduled their depositions. To the extent that the parties agree to reschedule their 

depositions consistent with the operative scheduling order, the Court’s approval 

is not necessary. Therefore, the Court DENIES the parties’ motion to stay 

depositions for 60 days. 

However, finding good cause and after consultation with the chambers of the 

Honorable United States District Judge Roger T. Benitez, the Court GRANTS the 

motion to continue the dates in the scheduling order by at least 60 days, and sua 

sponte continues the pretrial dates by approximately 90 days. The deadlines in 

this case are amended as follows:

1. The deadline for completion of fact discovery is November 17, 2020;

2. The deadline for serving interrogatories, requests for admission, and 

requests for production is September 18, 2020;

3. The deadline for designating experts is August 11, 2020;

4. The deadline for designating rebuttal experts is August 25, 2020;

5. The deadline for disclosures under Rule 26(a)(2)(A) is

September 22, 2020;

6. The deadline for disclosures under Rule 26(a)(2)(D) and Rule 26(e) is 

October 6, 2020;

7. The deadline for completion of expert discovery is 

November 17, 2020; 

8. The pretrial motion deadline is December 17, 2020; 

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:18-cv-02178-BEN-MSB Document 48 Filed 04/07/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 4
3 18cv2178-BEN (MSB)

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

9. The Mandatory Settlement Conference will be held on December 2, 

2020, at 9:30 a.m., in the chambers of Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg located 

at 221 West Broadway, second floor, San Diego, CA 92101. Confidential 

Settlement Statements must be lodged with the Court no later than November 25, 

2020.

10. For bench trials before the Honorable Roger T. Benitez, counsel shall 

file their Memoranda of Contentions of Fact and Law and take any other action 

required by Civil Local Rule 16.1(f)(2) by January 25, 2021.

11. Counsel shall comply with the pre-trial disclosure requirements of 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3) by January 25, 2021. 

12. Counsel shall meet and take the action required by Civil Local Rule 

16.1(f)(4) by February 1, 2021.

13. Counsel for plaintiff will be responsible for preparing the pretrial 

order and arranging the meetings of counsel pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16.1(f). 

By February 8, 2021, plaintiff's counsel must provide opposing counsel with the 

proposed pretrial order for review and approval. 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 Final Pretrial Conference Order, including objections to 

any other parties' Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures 

shall be prepared, served and lodged with the assigned district judge by February 

15, 2021.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:18-cv-02178-BEN-MSB Document 48 Filed 04/07/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 4
4 18cv2178-BEN (MSB)

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

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

Honorable Roger T. Benitez on February 22, 2021 at 10:30 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 7, 2020

Case 3:18-cv-02178-BEN-MSB Document 48 Filed 04/07/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 4