Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01514/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01514-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
DG Strategic VII, LLC
Defendant
Ignacio Garcia
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Ignacio Garcia (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action against Defendants in state court on 

July 28, 2023. (Doc. 1). Defendant DG Strategic VII, LLC (“Defendant”) removed the action to this 

Court on October 23, 2023. Id. Plaintiff asserts employment claims against Defendant. Id. at 16. 

IGNACIO GARCIA,

Plaintiff,

v.

DG STRATEGIC VII, LLC.

Defendant.

Case No. 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB

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

Rule 26 Disclosures: February 6, 2024

Pleading Amendment: March 22, 2024 

Discovery Deadlines:

 Non-Expert: August 16, 2024

 Expert: October 25, 2024

 Mid-Discovery Status Conf.: July 5, 2024

Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines:

 Filing: November 1, 2024

 Hearing: December 6, 2024, 10:30 a.m.

Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 

 Filing: December 20, 2024

 Hearing: February 4, 2025, 8:30 a.m.

Pre-Trial Conference: March 31, 2025, 1:30 p.m.

 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA

Trial: May 28, 2025, 8:30 a.m.

 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA

 Estimated: 4-5 days

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 1 of 8
2

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

The parties convened via Zoom videoconference for a scheduling conference before Magistrate Judge 

Christopher D. Baker on January 23, 2024. Stephen D. Counts appeared on behalf of Plaintiff and 

Andrew W. Russell appeared on behalf of Defendant. 

I. Magistrate Judge Consent

Currently there is no joint consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction.

Notice of Congested Docket and Court Policy of Trailing

Due to the District Judges’ heavy caseload, the adopted policy of the Fresno Division of the 

Eastern District is to trail all civil cases. The parties are hereby notified that for a trial date set before a 

District Judge, the parties will trail indefinitely behind any higher priority criminal or older civil case 

set on the same date until a courtroom becomes available. The trial date will not be reset.

The Magistrate Judges’ availability is far more realistic and accommodating to parties than that 

of the District Judges who carry the heaviest caseloads in the nation and who must prioritize criminal 

and older civil cases over more recently filed civil cases. A Magistrate Judge may conduct trials, 

including entry of final judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, 

and Local Rule 305. Any appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate Judge is taken directly to 

the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. 

Therefore, the parties are directed to consider consenting to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction to 

conduct all further proceedings, including trial, and to file a consent/decline form (provided by the 

Court at the inception of this case) indicating whether they will consent to the jurisdiction of the 

Magistrate Judge.

II. Pleading Amendment

Any motions to amend the pleadings, including to add parties and/or allegations and claims, 

must be filed by March 22, 2024. Filing a motion and/or stipulation 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) 

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 2 of 8
3

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

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

182 (1962).

III. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date

The parties shall exchange the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) by no 

later than February 6, 2024.

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

August 16, 2024, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before October 25, 2024.

The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses1, in writing, on or before August 30, 

2024, and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before September 20, 2024. 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 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.

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.

A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for July 5, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. before Judge

Baker. Counsel SHALL file a joint mid-discovery status conference report no later than one week 

before the conference. Counsel also SHALL lodge the joint status report via e-mail to 

CDBorders@caed.uscourts.gov. The joint status report SHALL outline the discovery counsel have 

completed and that which needs to be completed as well as any impediments to completing the 

discovery within the deadlines set forth in this order. Counsel SHALL discuss settlement and certify 

1

In the event an expert will offer opinions related to an independent medical or mental health 

evaluation, the examination SHALL occur sufficiently in advance of the disclosure deadline so the expert’s 

report fully details the expert’s opinions in this regard.

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 3 of 8
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

in the joint status report (1) that they have met/conferred regarding settlement, and (2) proposed dates 

for convening a settlement conference before a U.S. Magistrate Judge. 

IV. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule / Informal Discovery Dispute Conferences

All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed no later 

than November 1, 2024,

2

and heard on or before December 6, 2024. The Court hears non-dispositive 

motions at 10:30 a.m. at the United States District Courthouse in Bakersfield, California before Judge 

Baker. 

No motion to amend or stipulation to amend the case schedule will be entertained unless it is 

filed at least one week before the first deadline the parties wish to extend. Likewise, no written 

discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the Court. A party with a discovery 

dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve by agreement the 

issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the moving party promptly shall seek a 

hearing with all involved parties and Judge Baker. For these hearings and at the direction of the 

Courtroom Deputy Clerk, the Court may direct counsel to appear remotely (via Zoom). For hearings 

noticed to occur in-person, the Court may permit counsel to appear remotely (via Zoom) provided the 

Courtroom Deputy Clerk receives a written notice of the request to appear remotely no later than five 

court days before the noticed hearing date. 

At least three days before the conference, counsel SHALL file informal letter briefs detailing 

their positions. The briefs may not exceed 5 pages, excluding exhibits. Counsel must comply with 

Local Rule 251 with respect to discovery disputes.

All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than December 20, 2024, and heard on 

or before February 4, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. In scheduling such motions, absent consent to Magistrate 

Judge jurisdiction, counsel SHALL consult the assigned District Judge’s general information and 

calendar accordingly and SHALL comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rules 230 and 260. 

2 Non-dispositive motions related to non-expert discovery SHALL be filed within a 

reasonable time of discovery of the dispute, but in no event later than 10 days after the expiration of 

the non-expert discovery deadline.

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 4 of 8
5

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

V. Motions for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication

At least 21 days before filing a motion for summary judgment or motion for summary 

adjudication, the parties SHALL meet, in person or by telephone, to confer about 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; 5) explore the possibility of settlement before the parties incur the 

expense of briefing a motion; and 6) to develop a joint statement of undisputed facts.

The moving party SHALL initiate the meeting and SHALL provide a complete, proposed 

statement of undisputed facts at least five days before the conference. The finalized joint statement 

of undisputed facts SHALL include all facts that the parties agree, for purposes of the motion, may be 

deemed true. In addition to the requirements of Local Rule 260, the moving party shall file the 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. 

Failure to comply may result in the motion being stricken.

VI. Pre-Trial Conference

March 31, 2025, at 1:30 p.m., located at the United States District Courthouse, 2500 Tulare 

Street, in Fresno, California, before District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston.

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 District Judge Thurston’s chambers, by email at JLTorders@caed.uscourts.gov. 

Counsels’ 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 pre-trial 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.

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 5 of 8
6

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

VII. Trial Date

May 28, 2025, at 8:30 a.m., located at the United States District Courthouse, 2500 Tulare 

Street, in Fresno, California, before District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston.

A. This is a jury trial.

B. Counsels’ Estimate of Trial Time: 4-5 days.

C. Counsels’ attention is directed to Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of 

California, Rule 285.

VIII. Settlement Conference

The parties SHALL meet and confer and notify the Court prior to the Pre-Trial Conference 

whether they wish to convene a Settlement Conference. In the event the parties request a Settlement 

Conference, 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 terms3at the conference.

 Consideration of settlement is a serious matter that requires preparation prior to the settlement 

conference. Set forth below are the procedures the Court will employ, absent good cause, in 

conducting the conference.

At least twenty-one days before the settlement conference, Plaintiff SHALL submit to 

Defendant via fax or e-mail, a written itemization of damages and a meaningful4settlement demand 

which includes a brief explanation of why such a settlement is appropriate. Thereafter, no later than 

fourteen days before the settlement conference, Defendant SHALL respond, via fax or e-mail, with an 

3

Insurance carriers, business organizations, and governmental bodies or 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 authority, if he or she deems 

it appropriate, to settle the action on terms consistent with the opposing party's most recent demand.

4 “Meaningful” means the offer is reasonably calculated to settle the case on terms acceptable to 

the offering party. “Meaningful” does not include an offer which the offering party knows will not be 

acceptable to the other party. If, however, the offering party is only willing to offer a settlement which 

it knows the other party will not accept, this should trigger a recognition the case is not in a settlement 

posture and the parties should confer about continuing or vacating the settlement conference via 

stipulation.

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 6 of 8
7

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

acceptance of the offer or with a meaningful counteroffer which includes a brief explanation of why 

such a settlement is appropriate. 

If settlement is not achieved, each party SHALL attach copies of their settlement offers to their 

Confidential Settlement Conference Statement, as described below. Copies of these documents shall 

not be filed on the court docket.

CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT 

At least five court days prior to the settlement conference, the parties shall submit, directly to 

Judge Baker’s chambers by e-mail to CDBOrders@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. 

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.

IX. Request for Bifurcation, Appointment of Special Master, or other Techniques to Shorten 

Trial

None at this time. 

X. Related Matters Pending

There are no pending related matters.

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 7 of 8
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

XI. 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 requires compliance with these Rules to efficiently handle its increasing case load.

XII. 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 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.

The dates set in this Order are considered to be firm and will not be modified absent a 

showing of good cause even if the request to modify is made by stipulation. 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: January 24, 2024 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-01514-JLT-CDB Document 10 Filed 01/24/24 Page 8 of 8