Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01120/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01120-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332ed Diversity-Employment Discrimination

---

1

19cv1120-JAH (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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ISMAEL ROMO, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, 

et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19cv1120-JAH (MSB)

ORDER GRANTING THIRD JOINT 

MOTION TO AMEND SCHEDULING 

ORDER

[ECF NO. 40]

The parties filed a “Third Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling Order” on April 

1, 2020. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff’s counsel explains in her declaration that, during 

the Parties’ negotiations concerning pending discovery issues and attempts to 

complete written discovery and depositions, on March 13, 2020, the President of 

the United States declared a national emergency due to the outbreak of the 

COVID-19 coronavirus. On March 19, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom 

issued a shelter in place order, in which California residents are ordered to stay in 

their homes except to go to an essential job or for other limited essential purposes.

(ECF No. 40-1 at 9.) Plaintiff’s counsel further explains that, as a result of the 

COVID-19 emergency and the California Governor’s order, Costco has sought to 

reschedule the depositions of Plaintiff’s treating physicians. (Id. at 10.) Moreover, 

the Parties also agreed to continue the deposition of Costco’s Rule 30(b)(6) witness 

Case 3:19-cv-01120-JAH-MSB Document 42 Filed 04/02/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 4
19cv1120-JAH (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

(which Plaintiff contends is very document-intensive and cannot efficiently be 

conducted by videoconference). (Id.) Furthermore, due to Costco’s need to 

respond to issues arising from the COVID-19 emergency, key Costco personnel 

whose input and/or participation is required in order to responding to Plaintiff’s 

pending written discovery requests and deposition notices became unavailable.

(Id.) 

With more than a month remaining of discovery, the Parties planned to 

serve further pleadings and deposition notices for depositions to take place before 

the discovery deadline but refrained from doing so considering the COVID-19 

emergency and Governor’s order. (Id. at 11.) The Parties are concerned that the 

COVID-19 emergency and the Parties’ resulting inability to complete discovery in 

accordance with the current case management dates may adversely affect their 

respective abilities to prepare the case for trial. (Id.) Despite their diligence, and in 

light of the need for sufficient time to complete discovery, prepare their respective 

expert witnesses, file and/or oppose pre-trial motions (including, but not limited to 

discovery motions, motions for summary judgment and/or partial summary 

judgment, motions to amend their respective pleadings to conform to the evidence 

developed during discovery, and motions in limine), and/or to seek any other relief 

permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, local rules, or other applicable 

law, notwithstanding any impact and/or delays caused by the COVID-19 

emergency, the Parties jointly request to continue the upcoming Scheduling Order 

deadlines by approximately sixty days in order to provide an initial measure of 

relief from any prejudice caused by the COVID-19 emergency. (ECF No. 40 at 13-

14.)

Based on the foregoing and after consulting with the chambers of the 

Honorable United States District Judge John A. Houston, the Court finds good cause 

and GRANTS the Joint Motion as follows: 

1. The deadline to complete all fact discovery is June 26, 2020;

Case 3:19-cv-01120-JAH-MSB Document 42 Filed 04/02/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 4
19cv1120-JAH (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

2. The deadline for initial expert designations is July 6, 2020;

3. The deadline for rebuttal expert designations is July 20, 2020;

4. The deadline for compliance with the disclosure provisions in Rule 

26(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is July 6, 2020;

5. The deadline for each party to supplement its disclosure regarding 

contradictory or rebuttal evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) is July 20, 2020;

6. The deadline to complete all expert discovery is August 21, 2020;

7. The deadline to file all other pretrial motions is September 11, 2020;

8. The Mandatory Settlement Conference remains as previously set on 

September 28, 2020, at 9:30 a.m., with the Settlement Conference Statement due 

on September 21, 2020;

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

R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) by December 14, 2020. 

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

16.1(f)(4) by December 21, 2020. 

14. By December 28, 2020, plaintiff’s counsel must provide opposing 

counsel with the proposed pretrial order for review and approval. 

15. The Proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order, including objections to 

any other parties’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures shall be prepared, 

served and lodged with the assigned district judge by January 4, 2021, and shall be 

in the form prescribed in and comply with Local Rule 16.1(f)(6).

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

Honorable John A. Houston on January 11, 2021 at 2:30 p.m. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 1, 2020

Case 3:19-cv-01120-JAH-MSB Document 42 Filed 04/02/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 4
19cv1120-JAH (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

Case 3:19-cv-01120-JAH-MSB Document 42 Filed 04/02/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 4