Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00227/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00227-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Felipe Montoya
Plaintiff
Time Warner Telecom Holdings Inc.
Defendant

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

FELIPE MONTOYA,

Plaintiff,

v.

TIME WARNER TELECOM HOLDINGS,

INC.,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:08cv00227 AWI DLB

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

Discovery Deadlines:

Non Expert: January 5, 2009

Expert: March 9, 2009

Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines:

Filing: November 24, 2008

Hearing: December 18, 2008

Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 

Filing: January 30, 2009

Hearing: March 2, 2009

Settlement Conference:

October 16, 2008, at 10:00 a.m.

Pre-Trial Conference:

April 3, 2009, at 8:30 a.m.

Courtroom 2

Trial: June 2, 2009, at 9:00 a.m.

Courtroom 2 JT 8 days

I. Date of Scheduling Conference

April 28, 2008.

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 1 of 8
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

II. Appearances of Counsel

Shelley G. Bryant appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

Daniel H. Handman and Amy A. Durgan appeared on behalf of Defendant.

III. The Pleadings

A. Summary of the Pleadings

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant unlawfully discriminated against him

based upon age by terminating his employment in January 2007, for alleged poor performance. 

Plaintiff further alleges that the reason offered for his termination is pretextual, factually

baseless, and unworthy of credence. Plaintiff seeks: (1) economic damages, including past and

future lost wages and benefits; (2) non-economic damages, including, but not limited to

emotional distress; and (3) punitive damages.

Defendant denies these allegations. It maintains that Plaintiff's

employment was terminated for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons having to do with his

work performance and violation of company policy – not his age. Defendant denies all other

allegations of wrongful conduct and denies that Plaintiff has suffered any damages.

B. Orders Re Amendment of Pleadings

No amendments are proposed at this time. 

IV. Factual Summary

A. Admitted Facts which are deemed proven without further proceedings:

1. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant unlawfully discriminated against

him based upon age by terminating his employment in January

2007, for alleged poor performance. Plaintiff further alleges that

the reason offered for his termination is pretextual, factually

baseless, and unworthy of credence. 

2. Plaintiff seeks: 

a. economic damages, including past and future lost wages

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 2 of 8
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

and benefits;

b. non-economic damages, including, but not limited to

emotional distress; and 

c. punitive damages.

3. Defendant denies these allegations. It maintains that Plaintiff's

employment was terminated for legitimate, non-discriminatory

reasons having to do with his work performance and violation of

company policy – not his age. 

4. Defendant denies all other allegations of wrongful conduct and

denies that Plaintiff has suffered any damages.

5. Plaintiff is a resident of the Eastern District of California where the

alleged discrimination occurred. 

6. Time Warner Telecom Holdings Inc. ("TWTC"), is a Delaware

corporation, with its headquarters and principal place of business

in Colorado, and conducts business in California.

7. Mr. Montoya was employed by a company that was ultimately

acquired by TWTC from November 1998, to January 11, 2001, and

then by TWTC from that date to January 12, 2007.

B. Contested Facts:

1. All remaining factual issues in the Complaint are generally

contested. 

V. Legal Issues

A. Uncontested:

1. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

2. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

3. The parties agree that the substantive law of the State of California

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 3 of 8
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

provides the rule of decision for Plaintiff's discrimination claim. 

Plaintiff's claims for age discrimination arise under the California

Fair Housing and Employment Act (FEHA), which authorizes

injunctive relief and attorney's fees. [Cal. Gov't Code §§12940 et

seq.] Plaintiff's claim for punitive damages arises under California

law as well. [See Cal. Civ. Code §3294.]

B. Contested:

1. All remaining legal issues are contested.

VI. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date

The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or

before January 5, 2009, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before March 9, 2009.

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

January 26, 2009, and to disclose all supplemental experts on or before February 9, 2009. The

written designation of experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A)

and (B) 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 disclosed pursuant to 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.

VII. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule

All Non-Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions, including any discovery motions, shall be

filed no later than November 24, 2008, and heard on or before December 18, 2008. Nondispositive motions are heard on Fridays at 9:00 a.m., before the Honorable Dennis L. Beck,

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 4 of 8
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 WordPerfect X3 is not available to the parties then the latest version of WordPerfect 1

or any other word processing program in general use for IBM compatible personal computers is

acceptable. 

5

United States Magistrate Judge in Courtroom 9. Counsel must comply with Local Rule 37-251

with respect to discovery disputes or the motion will be denied without prejudice and

dropped from calendar.

In scheduling such motions, the Magistrate Judge may grant applications for an

order shortening time pursuant to Local Rule 6-142(d). However, if counsel does not obtain an

order shortening time, the notice of motion must comply with Local Rule 37-251. 

Counsel may appear and argue non-dispositive motions by telephone, providing a

written request to so appear is made to the Magistrate Judge's Courtroom Clerk no later than five

(5) court days before the noticed hearing date. In the event that more than one attorney requests

to appear by telephone then it shall be the obligation of the moving part(ies) to arrange and

originate a conference call to the court. 

All Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions shall be filed no later than January 30, 3009,

and heard no later than March 2, 2009, in Courtroom 2 before the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii,

United States District Court Judge. In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Local

Rules 78-230 and 56-260.

VIII. Pre-Trial Conference Date

April 3, 2009, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 2 before Judge Ishii.

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

Rule 16-281(a)(2). The parties are further directed to submit a digital copy of their pretrial

statement in Word Perfect X3 format, directly to Judge Ishii's chambers by email at 1

AWIOrders@caed.uscourts.gov. 

Counsels' attention is directed to Rules 16-281 and 16-282 of the Local Rules of

Practice for the Eastern District of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for the

pre-trial conference. The Court will insist upon strict compliance with those rules.

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 5 of 8
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

 Insurance carriers, business organizations, and governmental bodies or agencies whose 2

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.

6

IX. Trial Date

June 2, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2 before the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii,

United States District Court Judge.

A. This is a jury trial.

B. Counsels' Estimate of Trial Time: 8 days. 

C. Counsel's attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern

District of California, Rule 16-285.

X. Settlement Conference

A Settlement Conference is scheduled for October 16, 2008, at 10:00 a.m. in

Courtroom 9 before the Honorable Dennis L. Beck, U.S. Magistrate Judge.

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. 2

CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT 

At least five (5) court days prior to the Settlement Conference the parties shall

submit, directly to Judge Beck's chambers by e-mail to DLBOrders@caed.uscourts.gov, a

Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. The statement should not be filed with the

Clerk of the 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. 

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 6 of 8
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

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.

F. The party's position on settlement, including present demands and

offers and a history of past settlement discussions, offers and demands.

XI. Request 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 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 of

Practice for the Eastern District of California.

XIV. Effect of this Order

The foregoing 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

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 7 of 8
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

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.

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.

Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 5, 2008 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

9b0h UNI ie TED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00227-AWI-DLB Document 14 Filed 05/06/08 Page 8 of 8