Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-02392/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-02392-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice

---

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

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYNE BERRY and KAREN BERRY,

Husband and Wife,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DR. MICHAEL MARTIN, M.D. and JANE

DOE MARTIN, Husband and Wife;

ANESTHESIA SERVICE MEDICAL GROUP,

INC.; and SCRIPPS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

LA JOLLA,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 08 CV 2392 LAB NLS

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART JOINT MOTION TO

MODIFY EXPERT WITNESS

DESIGNATION DATES

[Doc. No. 34]

The parties filed a second joint motion to modify expert designation and other pretrial

dates. In their first application to extend dates, the parties did not present any showing of good

cause to grant their request. The court warned them that “[a]ny future requests to extend dates

will not be granted absent a showing of good cause.” See Doc. No. 33. In support of this

application, the parties summarily cited:“Good cause exists for this joint motion because the

independent medical examination of the Plaintiff cannot take place until February 2010.” Joint

Motion, p.4. The parties did not explain the reason for the delay, the efforts they took to avoid

delay, or any other reason to support their request. 

Case 3:08-cv-02392-LAB-NLS Document 36 Filed 12/28/09 Page 1 of 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

-2-

The court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the joint motion to extend the expert

and certain of the pretrial dates. The court hereby amends its Scheduling Order Regulating

Discovery and Other Pre-Trial Proceedings as follows:

1. Defendants shall designate their experts in writing by March 12, 2010. Defendants

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.

2. Plaintiffs and Defendants shall designate any rebuttal expert witnesses in writing

by March 26, 2010.

3. On or before April 2, 2010 , 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.

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

evidence under Rule 26(a)(2)(c) on or before April 16, 2010.

5. All discovery, including experts, shall be completed by all parties on or before

April 30, 2010. All discovery motions must be filed no later than May 3, 2010. All discovery

motions shall be filed in accordance with Civil Local Rule 77.1. No discovery motion shall be

filed ex parte. Any request to shorten time shall be filed in accordance with Civil Local Rule

7.1(e)(5).

6. All non-conflicting provisions of the court’s June 30, 2009 and October 20, 2009

scheduling orders remain in full force and effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: December 28, 2009

Hon. Nita L. Stormes

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

Case 3:08-cv-02392-LAB-NLS Document 36 Filed 12/28/09 Page 2 of 2