Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01252/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01252-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City of Farmersville
Defendant
Farmersville Police Department
Defendant
Bernardina Gomez
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BERNARDINA GOMEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF FARMERSVILLE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO

SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16)

Discovery Deadlines:

Initial Disclosures: January 3, 2017

Non Expert Discovery: October 10, 2017

Expert Disclosures: October 16, 2017

Rebuttal Expert Disclosures: November 6, 2017

Expert Discovery: December 22, 2017

Mid-Discovery Status Conference Deadlines:

 Status Report: August 8, 2017

 Status Conference: August 15, 2017

Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 

Filing: January 3, 2018

Hearing: January 31, 2018

Dispositive Motion Deadlines:

Filing: February 5, 2018

Hearing: March 19, 2018

Settlement Conference:

December 5, 2017, at 10:00 a.m.

Courtroom 7

Pre-Trial Conference:

May 16, 2018, at 10:00 a.m.

Courtroom 2

Trial: July 10, 2018, at 8:30 a.m.

 Courtroom 2

 7-10 Trial Days

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 1 of 9
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

I. Date of Scheduling Conference

The Scheduling Conference was held on December 20, 2016.

II. Appearances of Counsel

Daniel Kopfman, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiff Bernardina Gomez.

Craig Smith, Esq., appeared on behalf of Defendants City of Farmersville and 

Farmersville Police Department.

III. Consent to Magistrate Judge

The United States District Judges of the Eastern District of California currently have the 

heaviest caseload in the nation. Therefore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the parties who have 

not consented to conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial, before United States 

Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto, are encouraged to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction in 

an effort to have their case adjudicated in a timely and cost effective manner. Presently, when a 

civil trial is set before Judge Ishii, any criminal trial set which conflicts with the civil trial will 

take priority, even if the civil trial was set first. Continuances of civil trials under these 

circumstances will no longer be entertained, absent a specific and stated finding of good cause, 

but the civil trial will instead trail from day to day or week to week until the completion of either 

the criminal case or the older civil case. The parties are advised that they are free to withhold 

consent or decline magistrate jurisdiction without adverse substantive consequences.

IV. Initial Disclosure under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)

The parties are ordered to exchange the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 

26(a)(1) on or before January 3, 2017.

V. Amendments to Pleadings

Any motions or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings must be filed by no 

later than April 12, 2017. The parties are advised that filing motions and/or stipulations 

requesting leave to amend the pleadings by April 12, 2017 does not reflect on the propriety of the 

amendment or imply good cause to modify the existing schedule, if necessary. All proposed 

amendments must (A) be supported by good cause pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) if the 

amendment requires any modification to the existing schedule, see Johnson v. Mammoth 

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 2 of 9
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

Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992), and (B) establish, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 

15(a), that such an amendment is not (1) prejudicial to the opposing party, (2) the product of 

undue delay, (3) proposed in bad faith, or (4) futile, see Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 

(1962).

VI. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Dates

The parties are ordered to complete all non-expert discovery on or before October 10, 

2017, and all expert discovery on or before December 22, 2017.

The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, on or before October 

16, 2017, and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before November 6, 2017. The written 

designation of retained and non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 

26(a)(2), (A), (B) and (C) and shall include all information required thereunder. Failure to 

designate experts in compliance with this order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or 

other evidence offered through such experts that are not properly disclosed in compliance with 

this order.

The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) and (5) shall apply to all discovery relating to 

experts and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and 

opinions included in the designation. Failure to comply will result in the imposition of sanctions, 

which may include striking the expert designation and preclusion of expert testimony.

The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party's duty to timely supplement 

disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced.

The parties are cautioned that the discovery/expert cut-off deadlines are the dates by 

which all discovery must be completed. Absent good cause, discovery motions will not be heard 

after the discovery deadlines. Moreover, absent good cause, the Court will only grant relief on a 

discovery motion if the relief requested requires the parties to act before the expiration of the 

relevant discovery deadline. In other words, discovery requests and deposition notices must be 

served sufficiently in advance of the discovery deadlines to permit time for a response, time to 

meet and confer, time to prepare, file and hear a motion to compel and time to obtain relief on a 

motion to compel. Counsel are expected to take these contingencies into account when proposing 

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 3 of 9
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

discovery deadlines.

A mid-discovery status conference is set for August 15, 2017, at 10:15 a.m. in Courtroom 

7 before U.S. Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. Telephonic appearances are approved; all 

parties appearing telephonically shall coordinate one conference call to the Court at the date and 

time for the conference. By no later than August 8, 2017, the parties shall file a report providing 

an updated status of the case and discovery proceedings. If the parties determine that a status 

conference is unnecessary, they may request that the Court vacate the conference.

VII. Pretrial Motion Schedule

Unless prior leave of the Court is obtained at least 7 days before the filing date, all moving 

and opposition briefs or legal memorandum in civil cases shall not exceed 25 pages. Reply briefs 

filed by the moving parties shall not exceed 10 pages. Before scheduling any motion, the parties 

must comply with all requirements set forth in Local Rule 230 and 251.

A. Non-Dispositive Pretrial Motions

All non-dispositive pretrial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed by 

January 3, 2018, and heard on or before January 31, 2018. Non-dispositive motions are heard on 

Wednesdays at 9:30 a.m., before United States Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto in Courtroom 

7.

In scheduling such motions, the parties shall comply with Local Rule 230. The Magistrate 

Judge may grant Applications for an Order Shortening Time pursuant to Local Rule 144(e). 

However, if counsel does not obtain an Order Shortening Time, the Notice of Motion must 

comply with Local Rule 251. 

Compliance with the discovery deadlines requires motions to compel to be filed and heard

sufficiently in advance of the discovery deadline so that the Court may grant effective relief 

within the allotted discovery time. A party’s failure to have a discovery dispute heard sufficiently 

in advance of the discovery cutoff may result in denial of the motion as untimely. Counsel may 

appear and argue non-dispositive motions by telephone, providing a request to so appear is made 

to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Clerk no later than 3 court days before the noticed hearing 

date. In the event that more than one attorney requests to appear by telephone, it shall be the 

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 4 of 9
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

5

obligation of the moving part(ies) to arrange and originate a conference call to the Court.

Discovery Disputes: If a motion is brought under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, the parties must 

prepare and file a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement (“Joint Statement”) as required by 

Local Rule 251. The Joint Statement must be filed 7 calendar days before the scheduled hearing 

date. Courtesy copies of all motion-related documents, declarations, and exhibits must be 

delivered to the Clerk’s Office by 10:00 a.m. at least 4 court days before the scheduled hearing 

date. Motions will be removed from the court’s hearing calendar if the Joint Statement is not 

timely filed or if courtesy copies are not timely delivered. To satisfy the meet and confer 

requirement set forth in Local Rule 251(b), the parties must confer by speaking with each other in 

person, over the telephone or via video conferencing before the hearing about the discovery 

dispute. The Court may issue sanctions against the moving party or the opposing party if either

party fails to meet and confer in good faith.

B. Dispositive Pretrial Motions

All dispositive pretrial motions shall be filed no later than February 5, 2018, and heard no 

later than March 19, 2018, in Courtroom 2 before the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii, United States 

District Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed. R. Civ. P 56 and 

Local Rules 230 and 260.

Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication: Prior to filing a motion for 

summary judgment or motion for summary adjudication the parties are ORDERED to meet, in 

person or by telephone, and confer to discuss the issues to be raised in the motion.

The purpose of the meeting shall be to: 1) avoid filing motions for summary judgment 

where a question of fact exists, 2) determine whether the respondent agrees that the motion has 

merit in whole or in part, 3) discuss whether issues can be resolved without the necessity for 

briefing, 4) narrow the issues for review by the court, 5) explore the possibility of settlement 

before the parties incur the expense of briefing a summary judgment motion, and 6) arrive at a 

Joint Statement of Undisputed Facts.

The moving party shall initiate the meeting and provide a draft of the Joint Statement of 

Undisputed Facts. In addition to complying with the requirements of Local Rule 260 the 

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 5 of 9
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

moving party shall file a Joint Statement of Undisputed Facts.

In the Notice of Motion, the moving party shall certify that the parties have met and 

conferred as ordered above or set forth a statement of good cause for the failure to meet and 

confer.

VIII. Pretrial Conference Date

The Pretrial Conference is set for May 16, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2 before the 

Honorable Anthony W. Ishii, United States District Judge.

The parties are ordered to file a Joint Pretrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 

281(a)(2). The parties are further directed to submit a digital copy of their Pretrial Statement in 

Word format, directly to Judge Ishii's chambers by email at AWIorders@caed.uscourts.gov. 

Counsel’s attention is directed to Rules 281 and 282 of the Local Rules for the Eastern 

District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the Pretrial Conference. 

The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules. In addition to the matters set forth 

in the Local Rules the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include a Joint Statement of the case to be 

used by the Court to explain the nature of the case to the jury during voir dire.

IX. Trial Date

Trial is set for July 10, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 2 before the Honorable Anthony 

W. Ishii, United States District Court Judge. 

a. This is a jury trial.

b. Counsel's estimate of trial time: 7-10 days. 

c. Counsel’s attention is directed to Local Rule 285 for the Eastern District of 

California.

X. Settlement Conference

A Settlement Conference is scheduled for December 5, 2017, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 

7 before United States Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. Unless otherwise permitted in advance 

by the Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall appear at the Settlement Conference with 

the parties and the person or persons having full authority to negotiate and settle the case on any 

terms at the conference. Insurance carriers, business organizations, and governmental bodies or 

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 6 of 9
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

7

agencies whose settlement agreements are subject to approval by legislative bodies, executive 

committees, boards of directors or the like shall be represented by a person or persons who 

occupy high executive positions in the party organization and who will be directly involved in the 

process of approval of any settlement offers or agreements. To the extent possible the 

representative shall have the authority, if he or she deems it appropriate, to settle the action on 

terms consistent with the opposing party’s most recent demand. At least 1 week prior to the 

Settlement Conference the parties shall submit a Confidential Settlement Conference Statement 

directly to the chambers of Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto by e-mail at

skoorders@caed.uscourts.gov. The statement should not be filed with the Clerk of Court nor 

served on any other party, although, the parties may file a Notice of Lodging of Settlement 

Conference Statement. Each statement shall be clearly marked CONFIDENTIAL with the date 

and time of the Settlement Conference indicated prominently thereon. The Confidential 

Settlement Conference Statement shall include the following:

a. A brief statement of the facts of the case,

b. A brief statement of the claims and defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon 

which the claims are founded, a forthright evaluation of the parties' likelihood of 

prevailing on the claims and defenses, and a description of the major issues in 

dispute,

c. A summary of the proceedings to date,

d. An estimate of the cost and time to be expended for further discovery, pretrial and 

trial, 

e. The relief sought, and

f. The party's position on settlement, including present demands and offers and a 

history of past settlement discussions, offers and demands.

This Court will vacate the settlement conference if the Court finds the settlement 

conference will be neither productive nor meaningful in attempting to resolve all or part of this 

case. As far in advance of the settlement conference as possible, a party shall inform the Court 

and other parties that it believes the case is not in a settlement posture so the Court may vacate or 

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 7 of 9
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

8

reset the settlement conference. Otherwise the parties shall proceed with the settlement 

conference in good faith to attempt to resolve all or part of this case.

XI. Requests for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or Other

Techniques to Shorten Trial

Not applicable at this time.

XII. Related Matters Pending

There are no pending related matters.

XIII. Compliance with Federal Procedure

All counsel appearing are expected to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District of California, and to keep 

abreast of any amendments thereto. The Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it 

is to efficiently handle its increasing case load and sanctions will be imposed for failure to follow 

the Rules as provided in both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules for the 

Eastern District of California.

Additional requirements and more detailed procedures for courtroom practice before 

United States Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto can be found at the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of California’s website (www.caed.uscourts.gov) under Judges, United 

States Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto (SKO).

1

 All parties and counsel shall comply with the 

guidelines set forth therein.

XIV. Effect of this Order

This order represents the best estimate of the Court and counsel as to the agenda most 

suitable to dispose of this case. The trial date reserved is specifically reserved for this case. If the 

parties determine at any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met, counsel are 

ordered to notify the Court immediately of that fact so that adjustments may be made, either by 

stipulation or by subsequent status conference.

//

 

1

In the area entitled “Case Management Procedures,” there is a link to “Court Procedures.”

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 8 of 9
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

9

Stipulations extending the deadlines contained herein will not be considered unless they 

are accompanied by affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached exhibits, which 

establish good cause for granting the relief requested. The parties are advised that due to the 

impacted nature of civil cases on the district judges in the Eastern District of California, Fresno 

Division, that stipulations to continue set dates are disfavored and will not be granted absent good 

cause.

Should counsel or a party appearing pro se fail to comply with the directions as set 

forth above, an ex parte hearing may be held and contempt sanctions, including monetary 

sanctions, dismissal, default, or other appropriate judgment, may be imposed and/or 

ordered.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 21, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01252-AWI-SKO Document 12 Filed 12/21/16 Page 9 of 9