1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION – IN ADMIRALTY

IN RE SKANSKA USA CIVIL 

SOUTHEAST INC. AND 

SKANSKA USA, INC., AS 

OWNERS OF THE BARGE M8030

PRAYING FOR EXONERATION 

FROM OR FOR LIMITATION OF

LIABILITY

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

ADMIRALTY RULE 9(H)

CIVIL ACTION NO.

3:20-CV-05980 – RV/MJF

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 

LACEY COLLIER

MAG. JUDGE HOPE THAI

CANNON

CLAIMANTS’ MOTION TO EXPEDITE THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

FOR CLAIMANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

AND FUTURE OBJECTIONS TO DISCOVERY ORDERS

Claimants represented by the undersigned counsel, move this Honorable 

Court for an Expedited Briefing Schedule applicable to Claimants’ Motion for 

Partial Summary Judgment and any future objections to Magistrate Judge Hope Thai 

Cannon’s discovery orders, and state the following in support:

INTRODUCTION

The Court has made clear that a continuance of the September 13, 2021 bench 

trial setting is unlikely. Pursuant to the Court’s May 20, 2021 Order, the parties have 

convened on a weekly basis before Magistrate Judge Hope Thai Cannon to resolve 

discovery disputes as they arise in order to facilitate an efficient discovery process. 

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1225 Filed 07/29/21 Page 1 of 6
2 

ECF. N. 1159. During the July 28, 2021 Discovery Conference, Judge Cannon 

established an expedited briefing schedule relating to discovery-related matters due 

to the fast approaching bench trial setting and ongoing depositions. Claimants

represented by the undersigned counsel respectfully request this Honorable Court 

implement similar measures to minimize delays relating to the resolution of 

objections to discovery orders and briefing related to their Motion for Partial 

Summary Judgment. Accordingly, Claimants request the Court expedite the briefing 

schedule for their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment requiring that Petitioner 

file its opposition no later than 14 days from our July 23, 2021 submission. 

Additionally, if Claimants’ request for leave to reply is granted, Claimants would 

reply no later than 3 days of receiving service of Petitioner’s opposition.

1

 

Additionally, to ensure the efficient, timely resolution of any discovery matters, 

Claimants propose that any party wishing to object to Judge Cannon’s discovery 

orders do so within 3 days of the entry of the order and that any party opposing 

that objection do so within 1 full day of receiving the objection. 

ARGUMENT 

Claimants filed their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Dissolution 

of Injunction with exhibits (containing documents designated “confidential”) via 

 

1 The 3-day limit on filing objections to discovery orders would begin to apply upon 

the entry of this scheduling order for any discovery orders that have not yet been 

objected to timely. 

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1225 Filed 07/29/21 Page 2 of 6
3 

submission to the Court by email on Friday, July 23, 2021. While under N.D. Fla. 

L.R. 5.5(C), parties must move in advance to for leave to file any document under 

seal, the Protective Order entered in this matter provides: 

Where not reasonably possible [to redact or exclude from submission 

Confidential Information], any Party wishing to file a document or 

paper containing Confidential Information, may provisionally file such 

Information under seal, provided that the Designating Party then moves 

to seal within seven (7) days of the filing, explaining the bases for 

sealing the Information in question.

ECF. N. 1176 at p. 10. Accordingly, on Monday, July 26, 2021, Claimants 

electronically filed their Motion to File Provisionally under Seal their Motion for 

Partial Summary Judgment, given the considerable amount of evidence designated 

by Petitioners as confidential information that was incorporated into their Motion. 

Under N.D. Fla. Local Rule 56.1, a party opposing a Motion for Summary 

Judgment must file its opposition within 21 days. Under Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 72, 

parties may serve objections to a magistrate judge’s order within 14 days after being 

served with a copy. However, the Court has “inherent power to ‘control the 

disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for 

counsel and for litigants.’” L.E.A. Dynatech, Inc. v. Allina, 49 F.3d 1527, 1530 (11th 

Cir. 1995) (quoting Landis v. N. Am. Co. ̧ 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). Claimants’ 

Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, if granted, has the potential to significantly 

streamline the matter before the Court, resulting in efficiencies for the Court and 

parties, collectively. Indeed, if granted in its entirety, the Court may no longer need 

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1225 Filed 07/29/21 Page 3 of 6
4 

to convene the bench trial altogether. Accordingly, Claimants respectfully request 

this Court enter an expedited briefing schedule to ensure the matter is fully briefed 

and prepared for being ruled upon as soon as possible before the September 13, 2021 

bench trial setting. Additionally, Claimants’ request in relation to expediting 

objections to discovery orders advances Judge Cannon’s concern that discovery 

matters are expeditiously resolved ahead of the bench trial setting. Otherwise, either 

party may draw out a request to object to discovery orders, resulting in delay of the 

exchange of discovery ahead of the bench trial setting.

WHEREFORE, Claimants respectfully request that the Court enter an 

Expedited Briefing Schedule applicable to Claimants’ Motion for Partial Summary 

Judgment and any future objections to Magistrate Judge Hope Thai Cannon’s 

discovery orders. 

Dated: July 29, 2021 Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/ E. Samuel Geisler 

E. SAMUEL GEISLER, FL Bar # 83817 

D. NICOLE GUNTNER, FL Bar # 1028925 

BRYAN F. AYLSTOCK, FL Bar # 78263 

Aylstock, Witkin, Kreis & Overholtz, PLLC 

17 East Main Street, Second floor 

Pensacola, Florida 32502 

Office: (850) 202-1010 

Fax: (850) 916-7449 

sgeisler@awkolaw.com 

nguntner@awkolaw.com

baylstock@awkolaw.com 

sallyteam@awkolaw.com 

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1225 Filed 07/29/21 Page 4 of 6
5 

/s/ Thomas F. Gonzalez 

THOMAS F. GONZALEZ, FL Bar #173878 

J. NIXON DANIEL, III, FL Bar # 228761 

Beggs & Lane, RLLP 

501 Commendencia Street 

Pensacola, Florida 32502 

Office: (850) 432-2451 

tfg@beggslane.com 

jnd@beggslane.com 

/s/ Brian H. Barr 

BRIAN H. BARR, FL Bar 493041 

EMMANUELLA J. PAULOS, FL Bar 99010 

Levin Papantonio Rafferty Proctor 

Buchanan O’Brien Barr & Mougey, P.A. 

316 S. Baylen Street, Suite 600 

Pensacola, FL 32502 

Office: (850) 435-7000 

bbarr@levinlaw.com 

epaulos@levinlaw.com

Attorneys for Claimants

CERTIFICATE OF COUNSEL CONFERENCE

I hereby certified that I conferred with counsel for Petitioners in a good faith 

effort to resolve the issues raised in this motion as required by N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 

7.1(B). Petitioners advised that they oppose the relief sought within this Motion in 

its entirety.

/s/ E. Samuel Geisler 

E. Samuel Geisler 

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1225 Filed 07/29/21 Page 5 of 6
6 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify, on this 29th day of July, 2021, that the foregoing Motion to 

Expedite the Briefing Schedule for Claimant’s Motion for Partial Summary 

Judgment and Future Objections to Discovery Orders was filed via the Court’s 

CM/ECF system, which will automatically serve and send notification of such filing 

to all registered attorneys of record. 

/s/ Sam Geisler 

E. Samuel Geisler

Case 3:20-cv-05980-LC-HTC Document 1225 Filed 07/29/21 Page 6 of 6