Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00865/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00865-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Augzenta, Inc.
Counter Claimant
Lloyd Burton
Counter Claimant
Efrat Okev
Counter Claimant
Kristi Verma
Counter Defendant
Vishal Verma
Counter Defendant
Zentek Corporation
Counter 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

KRISTI VERMA, VISHAL VERMA AND 

ZENTEK CORPORATION, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

EFRAT OKEV, LLOYD BURTON AND 

AUGZENTA, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-EFB

PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

After reviewing the parties’ Joint Status Report, the Court makes the following 

Pretrial Scheduling Order.

I. SERVICE OF PROCESS

All named Defendants have been served and no further service is permitted 

without leave of court, good cause having been shown.

II. ADDITIONAL PARTIES/AMENDMENTS/PLEADINGS

No joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings is permitted without leave of 

court, good cause having been shown. 

III. JURISDICTION/VENUE

Jurisdiction is predicated upon 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Jurisdiction and venue are not 

contested. 

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

IV. DISCOVERY

All discovery, with the exception of expert discovery, shall be completed by

August 22, 2014. In this context, “completed” means that all discovery shall have been 

conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery 

shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has 

been ordered, the order has been obeyed. All motions to compel discovery must be 

noticed on the magistrate judge’s calendar in accordance with the local rules of this 

Court.

V. DISCLOSURE OF EXPERT WITNESSES

All counsel are to designate in writing, file with the Court, and serve upon all other 

parties the name, address, and area of expertise of each expert that they propose to 

tender at trial not later than October 22, 2014.

1

 The designation shall be accompanied 

by a written report prepared and signed by the witness. The report shall comply with 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B). 

Within twenty (20) days after the designation of expert witnesses, any party may 

designate a supplemental list of expert witnesses who will express an opinion on a 

subject covered by an expert designated by an adverse party. The right to designate a 

supplemental expert for rebuttal purposes only shall apply to a party who has not 

previously disclosed an expert witness on the date set for expert witness disclosure by 

this Pretrial Scheduling Order. 

Failure of a party to comply with the disclosure schedule as set forth above in all 

likelihood will preclude that party from calling the expert witness at the time of trial. An 

expert witness not appearing on the designation will not be permitted to testify unless the 

party offering the witness demonstrates: (a) that the necessity for the witness could not 

have been reasonably anticipated at the time the list was proffered; (b) that the Court 

 1 The discovery of experts will include whether any motions based on Daubert v. Merrell Dow 

Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) and/or Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999) 

are anticipated.

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

and opposing counsel were promptly notified upon discovery of the witness; and (c) that 

the witness was promptly made available for deposition.

For purposes of this Pretrial Scheduling Order, an “expert” is any person who may 

be used at trial to present evidence under Rules 702, 703, and 705 of the Federal Rules 

of Evidence, which include both “percipient experts” (persons who, because of their 

expertise, have rendered expert opinions in the normal course of their work duties or 

observations pertinent to the issues in the case) and “retained experts” (persons 

specifically designated by a party to be a testifying expert for the purposes of litigation). 

Each party shall identify whether a disclosed expert is percipient, retained, or 

both. It will be assumed that a party designating a retained expert has acquired the 

express permission of the witness to be so listed. Parties designating percipient experts 

must state in the designation who is responsible for arranging the deposition of such 

persons.

All experts designated are to be fully prepared at the time of designation to render 

an informed opinion, and give their bases for their opinion, so that they will be able to 

give full and complete testimony at any deposition taken by the opposing party. Experts 

will not be permitted to testify at the trial as to any information gathered or evaluated, or 

opinion formed, after deposition taken subsequent to designation. 

Counsel are instructed to complete all discovery of expert witnesses in a timely 

manner in order to comply with the Court’s deadline for filing dispositive motions. 

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

VI. MOTION HEARING SCHEDULE

The last day to hear dispositive motions shall be February 19, 2015. All papers 

should be filed in conformity with the Local Rules. However, with respect to Motions for 

Summary Judgment only, the parties shall comply with the following filing deadlines:

Motion for Summary 

Judgment

filed at least 8 weeks prior to hearing

Opposition and any 

cross-motion

filed at least 5 weeks prior to hearing

Reply and opposition to 

cross-motion

filed at least 3 weeks prior to hearing

Reply to cross-motion filed at least 1 week prior to hearing

Absent leave of the Court, all issues the parties wish to resolve on summary 

judgment must be raised together in one (1) motion or cross-motion. Should the parties 

wish to file additional motions for summary judgment, they must seek leave of the Court.

The parties are directed to the Court’s website for available hearing dates. 

(www.caed.uscourts.gov → choose Judges → choose Judge England → choose 

Standard Information)

All purely legal issues are to be resolved by timely pretrial motions. Failure to 

comply with Local Rules 230 and 260, as modified by this Order, may be deemed 

consent to the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily. Further, 

failure to timely oppose a summary judgment motion2 may result in the granting of that 

motion if the movant shifts the burden to the nonmovant to demonstrate that a genuine 

issue of material fact remains for trial. 

The Court places a page limit for points and authorities (exclusive of exhibits and 

other supporting documentation) of twenty (20) pages on all initial moving papers, twenty 

(20) pages on oppositions, and ten (10) pages for replies. All requests for page limit 

 2 The Court urges any party that contemplates bringing a motion for summary judgment or who 

must oppose a motion for summary judgment to review Local Rule 260.

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

increases must be made in writing to the Court setting forth any and all reasons for any 

increase in page limit at least fourteen (14) days prior to the filing of the motion.

For the Court’s convenience, citations to the Supreme Court Lexis database 

should include parallel citations to the Westlaw database.

The parties are reminded that a motion in limine is a pretrial procedural device 

designed to address the admissibility of evidence. The Court will look with disfavor upon 

dispositional motions presented at the Final Pretrial Conference or at trial in the guise of 

motions in limine.

The parties are cautioned that failure to raise a dispositive legal issue that could 

have been tendered to the court by proper pretrial motion prior to the dispositive motion 

cut-off date may constitute waiver of such issue. 

VII. FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

The Final Pretrial Conference is set for April 30, 2015, at 2:00 p.m. At least one 

of the attorneys who will conduct the trial for each of the parties shall attend the Final 

Pretrial Conference. If by reason of illness or other unavoidable circumstance a trial 

attorney is unable to attend, the attorney who attends in place of the trial attorney shall 

have equal familiarity with the case and equal authorization to make commitments on 

behalf of the client.

Counsel for all parties are to be fully prepared for trial at the time of the Final 

Pretrial Conference, with no matters remaining to be accomplished except production of 

witnesses for oral testimony. 

The parties shall file, not later than April 9, 2015, a Joint Final Pretrial Conference 

Statement. The provisions of Local Rules 281 shall apply with respect to the matters to 

be included in the Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement. In addition to those 

subjects listed in Local Rule 281(b), the parties are to provide the Court with a plain, 

concise statement that identifies every non-discovery motion tendered to the Court and 

its resolution. Failure to comply with Local Rule 281, as modified by this Pretrial 

Scheduling Order, may be grounds for sanctions. 

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

At the time of filing the Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement, counsel shall 

also electronically mail to the Court in digital format compatible with Microsoft Word, the 

Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement in its entirety including the witness and exhibit 

lists. These documents shall be sent to: mceorders@caed.uscourts.gov.

The parties should identify first the core undisputed facts relevant to all claims. 

The parties should then, in a concise manner, identify those undisputed core facts that 

are relevant to each claim. The disputed facts should be identified in the same manner. 

Where the parties are unable to agree as to what disputed facts are properly before the 

Court for trial, they should nevertheless list all disputed facts asserted by each party. 

Each disputed fact or undisputed fact should be separately numbered or lettered. 

Each party shall identify and concisely list each disputed evidentiary issue which 

will be the subject of a motion in limine. 

Each party shall identify the points of law which concisely describe the legal 

issues of the trial which will be discussed in the parties’ respective trial briefs. Points of 

law should reflect issues derived from the core undisputed and disputed facts. Parties 

shall not include argument or authorities with any point of law.

The parties shall prepare a joint statement of the case in plain concise language 

which will be read to the jury at the beginning of the trial. The purpose of the joint 

statement is to inform the jury what the case is about.

The parties are reminded that pursuant to Local Rule 281 they are required to list 

in the Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement all witnesses and exhibits they propose 

to offer at trial. After the name of each witness, each party shall provide a brief 

statement of the nature of the testimony to be proffered. The parties may file a joint list 

or each party may file separate lists. These list(s) shall not be contained in the body of 

the Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement itself, but shall be attached as separate 

documents to be used as addenda to the Final Pretrial Order. 

Plaintiffs' exhibits shall be listed numerically. Defendants' exhibits shall be listed 

alphabetically. The parties shall use the standard exhibit stickers provided by the Court 

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

Clerk’s Office: pink for plaintiff and blue for defendant. In the event that the alphabet is 

exhausted, the exhibits shall be marked “AA-ZZ” and “AAA-ZZZ” etc. After three letters, 

note the number of letters in parenthesis (i.e., “AAAA(4)”) to reduce confusion at trial. All 

multi-page exhibits shall be stapled or otherwise fastened together and each page within 

the exhibit shall be numbered. All photographs shall be marked individually. The list of 

exhibits shall not include excerpts of depositions, which may be used to impeach 

witnesses. In the event that Plaintiffs and Defendants offer the same exhibit during trial, 

that exhibit shall be referred to by the designation the exhibit is first identified. The Court 

cautions the parties to pay attention to this detail so that all concerned will not be 

confused by one exhibit being identified with both a number and a letter. 

The Final Pretrial Order will contain a stringent standard for the offering at trial of 

witnesses and exhibits not listed in the Final Pretrial Order, and the parties are cautioned 

that the standard will be strictly applied. On the other hand, the listing of exhibits or 

witnesses that a party does not intend to offer will be viewed as an abuse of the Court’s 

processes.

 The parties also are reminded that pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure it will be their duty at the Final Pretrial Conference to aid the Court in: 

(a) the formulation and simplification of issues and the elimination of frivolous claims or 

defenses; (b) the settling of facts that should properly be admitted; and (c) the avoidance 

of unnecessary proof and cumulative evidence. Counsel must cooperatively prepare the 

Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement and participate in good faith at the Final 

Pretrial Conference with these aims in mind. A failure to do so may result in the 

imposition of sanctions which may include monetary sanctions, orders precluding proof, 

elimination of claims or defenses, or such other sanctions as the Court deems 

appropriate.

VIII. TRIAL BRIEFS

The parties shall file trial briefs not later than April 16, 2015. Counsel are 

directed to Local Rule 285 regarding the content of trial briefs. 

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

IX. EVIDENTIARY AND/OR PROCEDURAL MOTIONS

Any evidentiary or procedural motions are to be filed by April 9, 2015. 

Oppositions must be filed by April 16, 2015, and any reply must be filed by April 23, 

2015. The motions will be heard by the Court at the same time as the Final Pretrial 

Conference.

X. TRIAL SETTING

The trial is set for June 22, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. Trial will be a jury trial. The panel 

will consist of seven (7) jurors. The parties estimate a trial length of five (5) days.

XI. SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

A Settlement Conference is set before Judge Allison Claire on June 9, 2014, at 

9:00 a.m.

Each party is directed to have a principal capable of disposition at the Settlement 

Conference or to be fully authorized to settle the matter on any terms at the Settlement 

Conference.

Each party is directed to submit to the chambers of Judge Allison Claire 

confidential settlement conference statements not later than June 2, 2014. Such 

statements are neither to be filed with the clerk nor served on opposing counsel. 

However, each party shall notify the other party that the statement has been submitted 

to the judge’s chambers.

XII. VOLUNTARY DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM

Pursuant to Local Rule 271 parties will need to lodge a stipulation and proposed 

order requesting referral to the Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program. 

XIII. MODIFICATION OF PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

The parties are reminded that pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure, the Pretrial Scheduling Order shall not be modified except by leave of court 

upon a showing of good cause. Agreement by the parties pursuant to stipulation alone 

to modify the Pretrial Scheduling Order does not constitute good cause. Except in 

///

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 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

extraordinary circumstances, unavailability of witnesses or counsel will not constitute 

good cause.

XIV. OBJECTIONS TO PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

This Pretrial Scheduling Order will become final without further order of the Court 

unless objections are filed within seven (7) court days of service of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 17, 2014

Case 2:13-cv-00865-MCE-DB Document 43 Filed 03/18/14 Page 9 of 9