1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

Northern District of Illinois

Eastern Division

________________________________________________________________________

LUELLA PEHLKE, Individually and as

Special Administrator of the Estate of

FRANK PEHLKE, Deceased,

Case No.: 12−cv−00596

Plaintiff,

Honorable Virginia M. Kendall

v. 

CBS Corporation, 

Defendant.

________________________________________________________________________

Reply in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion to Limit Motions in Limine and Daubert Motions to 

Non-Dispositive

_______________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to this Court’s order and the proceedings on the record, Plaintiff submits this 

reply in support of Plaintiff’s motion to limit all Motions in Limine and Daubert motions to nondispositive in the instant case. (ECF Doc # 39.)

Argument

Defendant CBS Corporation responded to Plaintiff’s motion after the deadline for 

response set in the Court’s February 10, 2016 order and did not move to extend time pursuant to 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B) or make a showing of excusable neglect. Therefore, this Court should 

strike CBS’s response (ECF Doc # 46) pursuant to L.R. 78.3 and find for Plaintiff for the reasons 

stated in Plaintiff’s motion (ECF Doc # 42.)

In its response, CBS admits the “deadline for summary judgment and other dispositive 

motions has passed” and makes no argument that dispositive Daubert motions and motions in 

Case: 1:12-cv-00596 Document #: 48 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:284
2

limine should be considered by the Court.1 (ECF # 46 at 1.) The Court should enter an order 

consistent with Plaintiff’s motion to limit all Motions in Limine and Daubert motions to nondispositive in the instant case because CBS offered no reason for not complying with a deadline 

set in MDL-875, which is the law of the case.

CBS’s arguments are straw man arguments that should be dealt with when specific 

Motions in Limine and Daubert motions are filed. Plaintiff does not waive or forfeit any 

response to CBS’s arguments. However, CBS’s arguments are not relevant to Plaintiff’s motion

at hand and therefore no response to CBS’s arguments is needed at this time. Response can be 

made on CBS’s arguments if they are asserted in future proceedings regarding Motions in Limine 

and Daubert motions.

CBS concludes with its request that “the Court deny the Plaintiff’s motion and find that 

Westinghouse’s remaining motions are related to non-dispositive issues and, as such, timely when 

filed with this Court.” (ECF # 46 at 7.) This Court should not make a determination about any

motions that have yet to be filed. This Court should determine whether Motions in Limine and 

Daubert motions are dispositive when they are in front of the Court and should strike any Motions in 

Limine and Daubert motions it finds are dispositive.

Conclusion

For the reasons in this reply and in Plaintiff’s motions this Court should limit all Motions 

in Limine and Daubert motions to non-dispositive matters.

Dated: April 22, 2016

_/s/ Daniel B. Hausman___________

Attorney for Plaintiff

 

1 CBS contested whether Daubert motions and motions in limine could be dispositive in the 

parties’ joint proposed discovery and pretrial scheduling order, necessitating Plaintiff to file this 

motion. (ECF Doc #37)

Case: 1:12-cv-00596 Document #: 48 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:285
3

Daniel B. Hausman

Robert G. McCoy

Cascino Vaughan Law Offices, Ltd.

220 South Ashland Ave.

Chicago, IL 60607

(312) 944-0600

(312) 944-1870 (fax)

dhausman@cvlo.com

Case: 1:12-cv-00596 Document #: 48 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:286
4

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that on April 22, 2016, I caused the forgoing to be electronically filed 

with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois using the CM/ECF 

system which will automatically send all necessary notifications of this filing to CM/ECF 

participants in this case.

Dated: April 22, 2016

_/s/ Daniel B. Hausman___________

Attorney for Plaintiff

Daniel B. Hausman

Cascino Vaughan Law Offices, Ltd.

220 South Ashland Ave.

Chicago, IL 60607

(312) 944-0600

(312) 944-1870 (fax)

dhausman@cvlo.com

Case: 1:12-cv-00596 Document #: 48 Filed: 04/22/16 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:287