Kouba v. Renzenberger, Inc. et al, No. 4:2010cv00159 - Document 156 (D. Ariz. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER granting in part and denying in part 92 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 131 MOTION to Deny Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment ; striking 135 MOTION re: Plaintiff's Motion to Addendum a Few Sta tements and Exhibits ; granting 137 Motion to Strike ; granting 143 Motion to Strike ; accepted and adopting Report and Recommendations re 146 Report and Recommendations, Renzenberger's motion is granted on sexual harassment claim and t he wages claim beginning January 1,2009. Partial summary judgment is granted on the wages claim before January 1, 2009 Kouba's damages cannot exceed $1,197, plus interest. Renzenberger's motion is denied on the on-call claim.; denying 154 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. The Clerk of the Court shall strike Kouba's motion to add an addendum and the addendum (Docs. 135,136), and strike Kouba's sur-reply(Doc.142). The Clerk of the Court shall strike Plaintiff's reply (Doc.155) to transcript from the record. Parties shall file a proposed Joint Pretrial Order on or before 3/9/2012. Case referred to Magistrate Judge Edmonds.. Signed by Senior Judge Frank R Zapata on 2/6/2012.(JKM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Kouba v. Renzenberger, Inc. et al Doc. 156 1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 Albert Walter Kouba, 9 Plaintiff, 10 vs. 11 12 Renzenberger, Inc. Defendant. 13 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 10-159-TUC-FRZ (GEE) ORDER 15 Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge 16 Edmonds. In her Report and Recommendation, Judge Edmonds recommends that the Court 17 enter an Order granting in part and denying in part Defendant’s motion for summary 18 judgment; it also resolves several related miscellaneous motions. As the Court finds that the 19 Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motions, the parties’ objections are 20 denied.1 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 22 (1) Magistrate Judge Edmonds’ Report and Recommendation (Doc. 146) is accepted and 23 adopted. 24 25 26 27 28 1 The Court reviews de novo the objected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court reviews for clear error the unobjected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). To the extent there were objections to some of Judge Edmonds’ discussion of the facts, a review of the underlying record adequately supported her factual determinations. Dockets.Justia.com 1 (2) Renzenberger’s motions to strike (Docs. 137, 143) are granted; the Clerk of the Court 2 shall strike Kouba’s motion to add an addendum and the addendum (Docs. 135, 136), and 3 strike Kouba’s sur-reply (Doc. 142). 4 (3) Renzenberger’s motion for summary judgment and Kouba’s motion (Docs. 92 and 131) 5 are granted in part and denied in part as discussed in the text of the Report and 6 Recommendation. Renzenberger’s motion is granted on the sexual harassment claim and the 7 wages claim beginning January 1, 2009. Partial summary judgment is granted on the wages 8 claim before January 1, 2009. Kouba’s damages cannot exceed exceed $1,197, plus interest. 9 Renzenberger’s motion is denied on the on-call claim. 10 (4) Plaintiff’s “motion, request for extension of time to read and reply to court’s adding 11 transcripts of deposition to the record” (Doc. 154) is denied. The Clerk of the Court shall 12 strike Plaintiff’s reply (Doc. 155) to transcript from the record. The Court ordered 13 Renzenberger to file one deposition with the Court to simply allow the Court to look at one 14 issue raised in an objection in further detail. The Court did not Order the deposition filed to 15 spawn another few rounds of satellite litigation which would occur if Plaintiff’s motion was 16 granted. As the voluminous record in this case reflects, Plaintiff has had ample opportunity 17 to oppose Renzenberger’s motion for summary judgment in this case. The discovery 18 deadline and dispositive motion deadline has expired, a Report and Recommendation as to 19 the dispositive motion was issued several months ago, the parties had an opportunity to 20 object, the Report and Recommendation has been adopted, and a joint pretrial order and 21 motions in limine pertaining to trial are due in approximately 30 days. Plaintiff’s motion is 22 denied. 23 (5) The parties shall file a proposed Joint Pretrial Order on or before 3/9/12, which shall 24 include, but not be limited to, that prescribed in the form of Joint Pretrial Order attached. 25 Any motions in limine shall also be filed on or before 3/9/12. As pretrial motions remain 26 to be resolved as the Court expects that the parties will file motions in limine, and 27 Magistrate Judge Edmonds is very familiar with the unique circumstances in this case, 28 this case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Edmonds to issue a Report and -2- 1 Recommendation as to any motions in limine (or other pretrial motions). After the 2 Court receives the Report and Recommendation, any objections, and issues an Order as to 3 the Report and Recommendation, the Court will withdraw the reference to Magistrate Judge 4 Edmonds and issue a final pretrial Order setting dates for trial, the pretrial conference, and 5 the filing of proposed jury instructions, voir dire and verdict forms. 6 7 DATED this 6th day of February, 2012. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA *, Plaintiff(s), vs. *, Defendant(s). ) ) ) CV **-***-TUC-FRZ ) ) PROPOSED JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER ) ) ) ) ) Pursuant to the Scheduling Order previously entered, following is the proposed Joint Pretrial Order which shall, upon approval of the Court, become the Final Pretrial Order. I. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL II. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION Briefly state the facts and cite the statutes which give this Court jurisdiction. III. NATURE OF ACTION Provide a concise statement of the type of case, the cause of action, and the relief sought. IV. STIPULATIONS AND UNCONTESTED FACTS V. CONTESTED ISSUES OF FACT The following are issues of fact to be tried and determined upon trial. Each issue of fact must be stated separately and in specific terms, followed by the parties' contentions as to each issue. Issue: Plaintiff(s) contends: Defendant(s) contends: VI. RELEVANT UNCONTESTED ISSUES OF LAW (i.e. burdens of proof; standards of review) VII. RELEVANT CONTESTED ISSUES OF LAW The following are issues of law to be tried and determined upon trial. Each issue of law must be stated separately and in specific terms, followed by the parties' contentions as to each issue. Issue: Plaintiff(s) contends: Defendant(s) contends: VIII. LIST OF WITNESSES Each party shall provide a list of witnesses intended to be called at trial. Each witness shall be indicated as either fact or expert. A brief statement as to the testimony of each expert witness shall also be included. IX. LIST OF EXHIBITS Each party shall provide a list of numbered exhibits. A statement of either UNCONTESTED or CONTESTED shall follow each listed exhibit. If contested, a brief statement of the objection by the opposing party shall follow the listed exhibit. (eg - 1. Laboratory Report from the Clinical Immunology Diagnostic Laboratory dated June 15, 2004. CONTESTED - Relevance, foundation and hearsay.) X. LIST OF DEPOSITIONS Portions of depositions that will be read at trial must be listed by page and line number. A statement of either UNCONTESTED or CONTESTED shall follow. If contested, a brief statement of the objection by the opposing party shall follow the listed portion of the deposition to be offered. XI. MOTIONS IN LIMINE Plaintiff(s) have filed the following Motions in Limine: Defendant(s) have filed the following Motions in Limine: XII. JURY TRIAL or BENCH TRIAL For a Jury Trial Trial briefs (only upon request of the Court), proposed voir dire, interrogatories to the jury, stipulated jury instructions and instructions which are not agreed upon, shall be filed 10 days prior to Trial. For a Bench Trial Trial briefs (only upon request of the Court), shall be filed 10 days prior to Trial. Parties are referred to LRCiv 52.1 regarding the filing of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. XIII. PROBABLE LENGTH OF TRIAL CERTIFICATION The undersigned counsel for each of the parties in this action do hereby approve and certify the form and content of this proposed Joint Pretrial Order. Attorney for Plaintiff(s) Attorney for Defendant(s) This proposed Joint Pretrial Order is hereby approved as the Final Pretrial Order on this day of , 2***. FRANK R. ZAPATA United States District Judge
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
