Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02490/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02490-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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 The caption has been amended according to the Dismissal of Doe *

Defendants portion of this Order.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS WAGNER, TAMMY WAGNER,

 Plaintiffs,

 v.

CITY OF STOCKTON, a municipal

corporation; BLAIR ULRING, in

his capacity of chief of

police for CITY OF STOCKTON;

MARK BERG (Stockton Police

Department Star #0486);

JEFFERY TACAZON (Stockton Police

Department Star #1395); and

MICHELLE GUTHRIE (Stockton

Police Department Star #1524),

 Defendants.*

________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2:11-cv-02490-GEB-EFB

STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

ORDER

The status (pretrial scheduling) conference scheduled for

hearing on March 26, 2012, is vacated since the parties’ Joint Status

Report filed on March 12, 2012 (“JSR”) indicates the following Order

should issue.

DISMISSAL OF DOE DEFENDANTS

Since Plaintiffs have not justified Doe defendants remaining

in this action, Does 1-20 are dismissed. See Order Setting Status

(Pretrial Scheduling) Conference filed September 20, 2011, at 2 n.2

Case 2:11-cv-02490-EFB Document 15 Filed 03/19/12 Page 1 of 4
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

This time deadline does not apply to motions for continuances, 1

temporary restraining orders, emergency applications, or motions under

Rule 16(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

2

(indicating that if justification for “Doe” defendant allegations not

provided Doe defendants would be dismissed).

SERVICE, JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL PARTIES, AMENDMENT

No further service, joinder of parties or amendments to

pleadings is permitted, except with leave of Court for good cause shown.

DISCOVERY

All discovery shall be completed by July 23, 2013. In this

context, “completed” means that all discovery shall have been conducted

so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to

discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate orders, if necessary,

and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been complied with

or, alternatively, the time allowed for such compliance shall have

expired.

Each party shall comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

26(a)(2)(B) and (C)’s initial expert witness disclosure requirements on

or before March 15, 2013, and any contradictory and/or rebuttal expert

disclosure authorized under Rule 26(a)(2)(D)(ii) on or before April 15,

2013.

MOTION HEARING SCHEDULE

The last hearing date for a motion is September 23, 2013,

commencing at 9:00 a.m. A motion shall be briefed as prescribed in Local 1

Rule 230. 

The parties are cautioned that an untimely motion

characterized as a motion in limine may be summarily denied. A motion in

limine addresses the admissibility of evidence.

Case 2:11-cv-02490-EFB Document 15 Filed 03/19/12 Page 2 of 4
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

If a trial by jury has been preserved, the joint pretrial 2

statement shall also state how much time each party desires for voir

dire, opening statements, and closing arguments.

3

FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

The final pretrial conference is set for November 18, 2013, at

11:00 a.m. The parties are cautioned that the lead attorney who WILL TRY

THE CASE for each party shall attend the final pretrial conference. In

addition, all persons representing themselves and appearing in propria

persona must attend the pretrial conference.

The parties are warned that non-trial worthy issues could be

eliminated sua sponte “[i]f the pretrial conference discloses that no

material facts are in dispute and that the undisputed facts entitle one

of the parties to judgment as a matter of law.” Portsmouth Square v.

S’holders Protective Comm., 770 F.2d 866, 869 (9th Cir. 1985). 

The parties shall file a JOINT pretrial statement no later

than seven (7) calendar days prior to the final pretrial conference. The

joint pretrial statement shall address the applicable portions of Local

Rule 281(b), and shall set forth each theory of liability (“claim”) and

affirmative defense which remains to be tried, and the ultimate facts on

which each theory/defense is based. Furthermore, each party shall

estimate the length of trial. The Court uses the parties’ joint pretrial 2

statement to prepare its final pretrial order and could issue the final

pretrial order without holding the scheduled final pretrial conference.

See Mizwicki v. Helwig, 196 F.3d 828, 833 (7th Cir. 1999)(“There is no

requirement that the court hold a pretrial conference.”). 

If feasible, at the time of filing the joint pretrial

statement counsel shall also email it in a format compatible with

WordPerfect to: geborders@caed.uscourts.gov.

Case 2:11-cv-02490-EFB Document 15 Filed 03/19/12 Page 3 of 4
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

4

TRIAL SETTING

Trial shall commence at 9:00 a.m. on February 11, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 16, 2012

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:11-cv-02490-EFB Document 15 Filed 03/19/12 Page 4 of 4