Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00760/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00760-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

______________________________________________________________________________________ ________________ 

STIPULATION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY 

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

THERESA A. GOLDNER, COUNTY COUNSEL 

By: ANDREW C. THOMSON, DEPUTY (SBN 149057) 

Kern County Administrative Center 

1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor 

Bakersfield, CA 93301 

Telephone 661-868-3800 

Fax 661-868-3805 

Attorneys for Defendants County 

of Kern and Deputy Reed 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

D.G., a minor, by and through his 

guardian ad litem, Denise Bonilla, 

individually and as successor-in-interest 

to David Garcia, deceased; D.E.G., a 

minor, by and through her guardian ad 

litem, Denise Bonilla, individually and 

as successor-in-interest to David Garcia, 

deceased; G.D., a minor, by and 

through her guardian ad litem, Denise 

Bonilla, individually and as successorin-interest to David Garcia, deceased; 

RAMONA RAMIREZ NUNEZ, 

individually; 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

COUNTY OF KERN; DOES 1 

THROUGH 10; 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-00760 JAM-JLT 

STIPULATION TO AMEND THE 

SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND 

EXPERT DISCOVERY 

[ALL PARTIES REQUEST A JURY] 

COME NOW the Parties in this matter, and present this Stipulation for a Short 

Discovery Extension. 

Plaintiffs, D.G., a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem, Denise Bonilla; D.E.G., 

a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem, Denise Bonilla; G.D., a minor, by and through 

her guardian ad litem, Denise Bonilla; and Ramona Ramirez Nunez, (hereinafter collectively 

\ \ \ 

Case 1:15-cv-00760-JAM-JLT Document 31 Filed 06/14/16 Page 1 of 4
______________________________________________________________________________________ ________________ 

STIPULATION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY 

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

“Plaintiffs”) are jointly represented by Matthew C. Clark and Neil K. Gehlawat of ChainCohn-Stiles, and Dale K. Galipo of the Law Offices of Dale K. Galipo. 

Defendants, County of Kern (hereinafter “County”) and Deputy Robert Reed 

(hereinafter “Reed”), (hereinafter collectively “Defendants”) are represented by Andrew C. 

Thomson and Kathleen Rivera, Office of Kern County Counsel. 

Plaintiffs and Defendants are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Parties.” 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED TO, by and between the Parties, through 

their respective counsel of record, that an Order be entered modifying the Scheduling Order as 

follows: a) extend the Rule 26 Designation of Expert Witnesses to July 15, 2016; b) extend the 

Rule 26 Designation of Supplemental Experts to July 22, 2016; c) extend the expert discovery 

deadline to August 19, 2016; and d) maintaining the current “non-expert discovery” deadline 

of July 15, 2016. 

1. Whereas, the Parties have repeatedly met and conferred regarding discovery and 

expert witness discovery issues in an effort to informally resolve discovery and expert issues, 

including deposition scheduling and designation concerns; 

2. Whereas, the Parties continue to schedule the depositions of witnesses including 

the Coroner’s Pathologist, the Kern County Sheriff’s Office (hereinafter “KCSO”) Public 

Information Officer, the Investigator Technicians, the KCSO Persons Most Knowledgeable in 

21 separate categories, and other witnesses in conformance with the deadlines established by 

the Court in the Scheduling Order and Court’s recent Order for a discovery extension, and with 

deadline of July 15, 2016 for all discovery; 

3. Whereas, the Parties need deposition transcripts available for expert review and 

consideration prior to the experts preparation of their FRCP Rule 26 Reports; 

4. Whereas, the Parties continue to diligently work together to coordinate 

deposition scheduling and prompt transcript preparation; 

5. Whereas, in the spirit of civility, cooperation and good faith litigation, neither 

party has unilaterally scheduled depositions that are in conflict with the schedule of opposing 

counsel or the deponents; 

Case 1:15-cv-00760-JAM-JLT Document 31 Filed 06/14/16 Page 2 of 4
______________________________________________________________________________________ ________________ 

STIPULATION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY 

3 

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

6. Whereas, extension of the expert discovery deadlines are necessary as a result of 

the need to take the aforementioned depositions prior to designation of experts and to provide 

the experts the opportunity to review, analyze and consider the deposition testimony, the 

Parties are concerned that their experts will not have an opportunity to fully prepare expert 

reports. 

7. Whereas, since the Parties would like to ensure that all experts have the 

opportunity to review, analyze and include all of the deposition information in their Rule 26 

Expert Reports, the Parties request the following extensions: 

a) Extend the Rule 26 Designation of Expert Witnesses to July 15, 2016; 

b) Extend the Rule 26 Designation of Supplemental Experts to July 22, 2016; 

c) Extend the “expert discovery” deadline to August 19, 2016; and, 

d) Retain the non-expert discovery deadline as July 15, 2016. 

8. Whereas, the Parties are informed and believe that the foregoing will not 

adversely affect the remainder of the dates set forth in the Scheduling Order, the Parties 

respectfully request the Court’s consideration of this request. 

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED THAT: 

The Scheduling Order shall be amended to provide for the following deadlines extensions 

of two weeks: 

a) Extend the Rule 26 Designation of Expert Witnesses to July 15, 2016; 

b) Extend the Rule 26 Designation of Supplemental Experts to July 22, 2016; 

c) Extend the “expert discovery” deadline to August 19, 2016; and, 

d) Retain the non-expert discovery deadline as July 15, 2016. 

Dated: June 9, 2016 CHAIN-COHN-STILES 

 

 

 By /s/ Neil K. Gehlawat _ 

Matthew C. Clark 

Neil K. Gehlawat 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Case 1:15-cv-00760-JAM-JLT Document 31 Filed 06/14/16 Page 3 of 4
______________________________________________________________________________________ ________________ 

STIPULATION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY 

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

Dated: June 10, 2016 THERESA A. GOLDNER, COUNTY COUNSEL

 

 By /s/ Andrew C. Thomson _ 

 Andrew C. Thomson, Deputy 

 Attorneys for Defendants County of 

Kern and Deputy Reed 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

Dated: June 13, 2016 /s/ John A. Mendez _____ ____ 

JOHN A. MENDEZ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

22P4822 

Case 1:15-cv-00760-JAM-JLT Document 31 Filed 06/14/16 Page 4 of 4