Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00535/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00535-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

1 

17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB 

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 

eMove, Inc., et al., 

 Plaintiff,

v. 

Hire a Helper LLC, et al., 

 Defendant.

 Case No.: 17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB 

ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART 

AND DENYING IN PART 

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO AMEND; 

AND (2) ISSUING A REVISED 

AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 

[ECF Nos. 43, 61, 74, 90, 110] 

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order (ECF 

No. 110) and Defendants’ opposition thereto (ECF No. 111). Having reviewed the papers, 

Plaintiffs’ motion is untimely, and Plaintiffs have not shown good cause or excusable 

neglect for the extensions they seek. See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 

604, 609-10 (9th Cir. 1992); J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R, § III.C. If discovery from 

Defendants was needed by or before the March 12, 2018 deadline for expert reports, 

Plaintiffs could have served the discovery requests at issue prior to February 13, 2018. 

Plaintiffs also could have filed a motion seeking an extension of the expert report deadline 

prior to March 8, 2018. Nor do Plaintiffs adequately establish that the requested discovery 

is relevant to, much less necessary for, the expert report. In addition, good cause to 

continue deadlines is not shown by Plaintiffs’ assertion that their lead trial counsel will be 

out of the county because this assertion is lacking the particulars that could support a 

finding of diligence (such as when these travel plans were made, or the purpose of these 

travel plans). Nevertheless, Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order 

(ECF No. 110) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART in recognition of 

Case 3:17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB Document 112 Filed 03/12/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 4
2 

17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB 

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

Defendants’ lack of opposition to certain modifications and to reflect the Court’s 

preference that lead trial counsel participate in pretrial proceedings, not for good cause 

shown. 

The Court issues the following revised amended scheduling order, which revises the 

operative scheduling orders in this case (ECF Nos. 61, 74, 90) only to the extent IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. All expert disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) shall be served on 

all parties on or before March 13, 2018.

1

 The deadline to disclose any contradictory or 

rebuttal information remains as previously ordered (April 4, 2018). 

2. The parties must comply with the pretrial disclosure requirements of Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 26(a)(3) no later than June 22, 2018. Please be advised that failure to comply 

with this section or any other discovery order of the Court may result in the sanctions 

provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, including a prohibition on the introduction of 

experts or other designated matters in evidence.

3. Counsel shall confer and take the action required by Local Rule 16.1.f.4.a on 

or before June 29, 2018. The parties shall meet and confer and prepare a proposed pretrial 

order containing the following: 

 1. A joint neutral statement to be read to the jury, not in excess of one 

page, of the nature of the case and the claims and defenses. 

 2. A list of the causes of action to be tried, referenced to the Complaint 

[and Counterclaim if applicable]. For each cause of action, the order shall 

succinctly list the elements of the claim, damages and any defenses. A cause 

of action in the Complaint [and/or Counterclaim] which is not listed shall be 

dismissed with prejudice. 

 3(a). A list of each witness counsel actually expect to call at trial with a brief 

statement, not exceeding four sentences, of the substance of the witnesses’ 

testimony. 

 3(b). A list of each expert witness counsel actually expect to call at trial with 

a brief statement, not exceeding four sentences, of the substance of the 

witnesses’ testimony. 

 

1

 This deadline is extended by one day to reflect the length of time the motion was fully briefed before 

the undersigned. 

Case 3:17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB Document 112 Filed 03/12/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 4
3 

17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB 

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

 3(c). A list of additional witnesses, including experts, counsel do not expect 

to call at this time but reserve the right to call at trial along with a brief 

statement, not exceeding four sentences, of the substance of the witnesses’ 

testimony. 

 4(a). A list of all exhibits that counsel actually expect to offer at trial with a 

one-sentence description of the exhibit. All exhibits are to be identified 

numerically, plaintiff starting with “1” and defendant beginning with an 

agreed upon numerical designation. 

 4(b). A list of all other exhibits that counsel do not expect to offer at this time 

but reserve the right to offer if necessary at trial with a one-sentence 

description of the exhibit. 

 5. A statement of all facts to which the parties stipulate. This statement 

shall be on a separate page and will be read to and provided to the jury. 

 6. A list of all deposition transcripts by page and line, or videotape 

depositions by section, that will be offered at trial. 

 7. Counsel will note any objections they have to any other parties’ Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures. 

The Court encourages the parties to consult with the assigned magistrate judge to work out 

any problems in preparation of the proposed pretrial order. The court will entertain any 

questions concerning the conduct of the trial at the pretrial conference. 

 4. Counsel for the Plaintiff(s) must provide opposing counsel with the proposed 

pretrial order for review and approval and take any other action required by Local Rule 

16.1.f.6.a on or before July 6, 2018. 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. 

 5. The proposed pretrial order shall be lodged with the district judge’s chambers 

on or before July 13, 2018, and shall be in the form prescribed in Local Rule 16.1.f.6. 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

Case 3:17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB Document 112 Filed 03/12/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 4
4 

17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB 

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. The July 27, 2018 final Pretrial Conference before the Honorable Cathy 

Ann Bencivengo is VACATED and will be reset by separate order. The trial date remains 

as previously ordered. (See ECF No. 90.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 12, 2018 

Case 3:17-cv-00535-CAB-JLB Document 112 Filed 03/12/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 4