Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01455/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01455-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Shelita Larteri
Plaintiff
Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston
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

SHELITA LARTERI,

Plaintiff,

v.

LIBERTY LIFE ASSURANCE 

COMPANY OF BOSTON,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:19-CV-01455-DAD-SAB

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

Administrative Record Deadline: 

September 1, 2020

Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 

Filing: October 4, 2020

Opposition: October 18, 2020

Hearing: Pursuant to Local Rules

I. Date of Scheduling Conference

The Scheduling Conference was held on January 10, 2020.

II. Appearances of Counsel

Counsel Cesar Gavidia, Jr., appeared telephonically on behalf of Plaintiff.

Counsel Blake J. Russum appeared telephonically on behalf of Defendant.

III. Consent to Magistrate Judge

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), to the parties who have not consented to conduct all 

further proceedings in this case, including trial,

1 before United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. 

 

1 Except those proceedings delegated to the United States magistrate judges by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the district 

judges by the Local Rules for the Eastern District of California.

Case 1:19-cv-01455-DAD-SAB Document 9 Filed 01/10/20 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

2

Boone, you should be informed that because of the pressing workload of United States district 

judges and the priority of criminal cases under the United States Constitution, you are encouraged

to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction in an effort to have your case adjudicated in a timely 

and cost effective manner.

Presently, when a civil trial is set before Judge Drozd, 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 may no longer be entertained, absent a specific and stated 

finding of good cause, but the civil trial may 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. Amendments to Pleading

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

later than April 17, 2020. The parties are advised that filing motions and/or stipulations 

requesting leave to amend the pleadings 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 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).

V. Discovery and Motion Schedule

The administrative record shall be filed on or before September 1, 2020. Motions for 

summary judgment shall be filed on or before October 4, 2020. Oppositions to the motions for 

summary judgment shall be filed on or before October 18, 2020. The motions shall be heard 

pursuant to the Local Rules in Courtroom 2 before United States District Judge Dale A. Drozd. 

In scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Fed. R. Civ. P 56 and Local Rules 230 

and 260.

Case 1:19-cv-01455-DAD-SAB Document 9 Filed 01/10/20 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

3

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 of 

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

before the parties incur the expense of briefing a summary judgment motion.

The moving party shall initiate the meeting. Since this is an action which shall be 

decided on the administrative record, the parties are relieved from the requirement to 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.

VI. Related Matters Pending

There are no pending related matters.

VII. Compliance with Federal Procedure

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

Procedure and the Local Rules 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 Stanley A. Boone can be found at the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of California’s website (http://www.caed.uscourts.gov) under Judges; 

United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone (SAB). In the area entitled “Case Management 

Procedures,” there is a link to “Standard Information.” All parties and counsel shall comply with 

Case 1:19-cv-01455-DAD-SAB Document 9 Filed 01/10/20 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

the guidelines set forth therein.

VIII. 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. 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. 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. 

Lastly, 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: January 10, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01455-DAD-SAB Document 9 Filed 01/10/20 Page 4 of 4