Uhler v. Dorel Home Furnishings, Inc. et al, No. 3:2023cv00467 - Document 32 (S.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER Granting In Part 29 Joint Motion to Extend Fact Discovery Deadline, and Issuing FIRST AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER. Status Conference set for 11/29/2023 at 1:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. Mandatory Settlement Conference set for 6/21/2024 at 2:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. Signed by Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard on 9/1/2023. (hmw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Uhler v. Dorel Home Furnishings, Inc. et al Doc. 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHASTA UHLER, Case No.: 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG Plaintiff, 12 13 v. 14 DOREL HOME FURNISHINGS, INC. and AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, 15 16 ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND FACT DISCOVERY DEADLINE, and Defendants. (2) ISSUING FIRST AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 17 18 [ECF No. 29] 19 20 Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to amend the scheduling order. ECF 21 No. 29. The parties seek an order from the Court extending the fact discovery deadline, 22 and, as a result, all other case management deadlines, by approximately three months. Id. 23 Parties seeking to continue deadlines in the scheduling order must demonstrate good 24 cause. FED. R. CIV. P. 16(b)(4) (“A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with 25 the judge’s consent”); ECF No. 13 at 6 (Scheduling Order, stating that “[t]he dates set forth 26 herein will not be modified except for good cause shown” and reiterating diligence 27 requirement); see also Chmb.R. at 2 (stating that any request for continuance requires “[a] 28 showing of good cause for the request”). 1 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG Dockets.Justia.com 1 “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard that has been construed broadly across 2 procedural and statutory contexts. Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 3 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to 4 amend the scheduling order and the reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth 5 Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (“[T]he focus of the inquiry is upon 6 the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification. . . . If that party was not diligent, the 7 inquiry should end.”) (internal citation omitted). Therefore, “a party demonstrates good 8 cause by acting diligently to meet the original deadlines set forth by the court.” Merck v. 9 Swift Transp. Co., No. CV-16-01103-PHX-ROS, 2018 WL 4492362, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 10 19, 2018). 11 Here, the parties have represented to the Court that they “have been diligent in their 12 efforts to complete discovery.” ECF No. 29 at 2. The parties represent that depositions of 13 central witnesses to this action, such as Plaintiff and Defendant’s corporate representatives, 14 have not yet been taken, since the parties have not completed written discovery. Id. at 3. 15 Thus, the parties “only seek a short extension”1 of three months, to permit these depositions 16 to occur. Id. at 4. 17 As an initial matter, the parties’ motion is deficient. First, the instant motion to 18 continue the August 25, 2023, fact discovery deadline was filed on August 21, 2023. ECF 19 No. 29. By filing the motion four days before the date of the affected deadline, the parties 20 failed to follow the Court’s Chambers Rules. See Chmb.R. at 2 (requiring that “[a]ll 21 requests for continuances must be made by a joint motion no less than seven calendar days 22 before the affected date”) (emphasis added). 23 Further, the Court has concerns about the parties’ diligence. Discovery opened on 24 March 28, 2023, after the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference. ECF No. 5 at 3. The Court held 25 an Early Neutral Evaluation Conference and Case Management Conference on 26 27 1 28 The Court notes that the parties’ have requested to add three months to a five-month fact discovery period—a sixty percent increase. 2 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG 1 April 11, 2023. ECF No. 12 However, Defendants did not serve Plaintiff with written 2 discovery requests until “the end of June 2023,” (ECF No. 29-1 at 2), and Plaintiff did not 3 submit FOIA requests on the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission until 4 June 21, 2023 (ECF No. 29-2 at 2). Both sides’ delays then adversely impacted their ability 5 to timely take depositions. Thus, the Court required the parties to provide a supplemental 6 status report in support of their joint motion. ECF No. 30. 7 In the parties’ supplemental filing, they confirmed the following depositions: Plaintiff’s Father on October 11, 2023; 8 Plaintiff 9 Dr. Allison Marie Lynch on October 16, 2023; Dr. Xia Li on October 19, 2023; 10 Barbara Darnell, D.V.M., on October 24, 2023; Amazon’s Rule 30(b)(6) designee on 11 November 15, 2023; and Dorel’s Rule 30(b)(6) designee on November 16, 2023. ECF No. 12 31 at 1–2. Further, the parties represented that Defendants have responded to Plaintiff’s 13 written discovery requests, and Plaintiff will respond to Defendants’ discovery requests by 14 September 15, 2023. Id. at 2. on October 4, 2023; 15 Despite the joint motion’s shortcomings, in light of the case’s posture and the 16 preference of courts to decide cases on the merits, the Court finds good cause to extend the 17 fact discovery deadline. As such, the Court GRANTS IN PART the joint motion (ECF 18 No. 29) and issues the following First Amended Scheduling Order: 19 1. All fact discovery must be completed by all parties by November 17, 2023. 20 “Completed” means that all discovery requests governed by Rules 30-36 of the Federal 21 Rules of Civil Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be propounded 22 sufficiently in advance of the discovery cut-off date so that they may be completed by 23 that date, taking into account the time permitted in the Rules for service, notice, and 24 responses. If any discovery disputes arise, counsel must meet and confer promptly and in 25 good faith in compliance with Local Rule 26.1(a). A failure to comply in this regard will 26 result in a waiver of a party’s discovery issue. Absent an order of the court, no stipulation 27 continuing or altering this requirement will be recognized by the Court. The Court expects 28 counsel to make every effort to resolve all disputes without court intervention through the 3 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG 1 meet-and-confer process. If the parties reach an impasse on any discovery issue, the movant 2 must email chambers at efile goddard@casd.uscourts.gov no later than 45 days after the 3 date of service of the written discovery response that is in dispute, seeking a telephonic 4 conference with the Court to discuss the discovery dispute. The email must include: (1) at 5 least three proposed times mutually agreed upon by the parties for the telephonic 6 conference; (2) a neutral statement of the dispute; and (3) one sentence describing (not 7 arguing) each parties’ position. The movant must copy opposing counsel on the email. No 8 discovery motion may be filed until the Court has conducted its pre-motion telephonic 9 conference, unless the movant has obtained leave of Court. All parties are ordered to read 10 and to fully comply with the Chambers Rules of Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard, 11 which can be found on the district court website and at: 12 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/judges/goddard/docs/Goddard%20Civil%20Pretrial%20Pr 13 ocedures.pdf. 14 2. In the parties’ joint motion, they propose November 17, 2023, as the fact 15 discovery deadline. ECF No. 29 at 5; see id. at 1 (the parties request that the Court 16 “extend the deadline for completion of fact discovery from August 25, 2023, to 17 November 17, 2023”) (emphasis added). However, in their supplemental report, the parties 18 “request November 17, 2023 as the deadline for serving written discovery to permit the 19 parties to request additional documents and information as necessary after, and in response 20 to, the depositions of the parties.” ECF No. 31 at 2 (emphasis added). The Court reiterates 21 that the deadline in Paragraph 1 refers to the completion of fact discovery. To confirm that 22 the parties have, in fact, completed discovery, the Court SETS a Status Conference for 23 November 29, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. via videoconference before the Honorable 24 Allison H. Goddard. Court staff will send the Zoom link to counsel in advance of the 25 conference. If either party contends that more discovery is necessary, they must submit an 26 email to the Court (at efile goddard@casd.uscourts.gov) by November 27, 2023, advising 27 the Court of precisely what other discovery is needed and specifically demonstrate their 28 diligence. 4 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG 1 3. The parties must designate their respective experts in writing by 2 December 18, 2023. The parties must identify any person who may be used at trial to 3 present evidence pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Fed. R. Evid. This requirement 4 is not limited to retained experts. The date for exchange of rebuttal experts must be by 5 January 18, 2024. The written designations must include the name, address and telephone 6 number of the expert and a reasonable summary of the testimony the expert is expected to 7 provide. The list must also include the normal rates the expert charges for deposition and 8 trial testimony. 9 4. By December 18, 2023, each party must comply with the disclosure 10 provisions in Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and (C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This 11 disclosure requirement applies to all persons retained or specially employed to provide 12 expert testimony, or whose duties as an employee of the party regularly involve the giving 13 of expert testimony. Except as provided in the paragraph below, any party that fails 14 to make these disclosures will not, absent substantial justification, be permitted to use 15 evidence or testimony not disclosed at any hearing or at the time of trial. In addition, 16 the Court may impose sanctions as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c). 17 18 5. Any party must supplement its disclosure regarding contradictory or rebuttal evidence under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D) by January 18, 2024. 19 6. All expert discovery must be completed by all parties by February 15, 2024. 20 The parties must comply with the same procedures set forth in the paragraph governing 21 fact discovery. 22 7. Failure to comply with this section or any other discovery order of the court 23 may result in the sanctions provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, including a prohibition on 24 the introduction of experts or other designated matters in evidence. 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // 5 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG 1 8. All dispositive pretrial motions, including motions for summary judgment and 2 motions addressing Daubert issues, must be filed by April 15, 2024.2 Counsel for the 3 moving party must obtain a motion hearing date from Judge Anello’s law clerk. The period 4 of time between the date you request a motion date and the hearing date may vary from 5 one district judge to another. Please plan accordingly. Failure to make a timely request 6 for a motion date may result in the motion not being heard. 7 9. A Mandatory Settlement Conference will be conducted on June 21, 2024 at 8 2:00 p.m. in the chambers of Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. Plaintiff must serve 9 on Defendant a written settlement proposal, which must include a specific demand 10 amount, no later than May 28, 2024. The defendant must respond to the plaintiff in writing 11 with a specific offer amount prior to the Meet and Confer discussion. The parties should 12 not file or otherwise copy the Court on these exchanges. Rather, the parties must include 13 their written settlement proposals in their respective Settlement Conference Statements to 14 the Court. Counsel for the parties must meet and confer in person or by phone no later than 15 June 4, 2024. Each party must prepare a Settlement Conference Statement, which will be 16 served on opposing counsel and lodged with the Court no later than June 11, 2024. The 17 Statement must be lodged in .pdf format via email to efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov 18 (not filed). The substance of the Settlement Conference Statement must comply fully with 19 Judge Goddard’s Mandatory Settlement Conference Rules (located at 20 https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/Judges/goddard/docs/Goddard%20Mandatory%20Settlem 21 ent%20Conference%20Rules.pdf). Each party may also prepare an optional Confidential 22 Settlement Letter for the Court’s review only, to be lodged with the Court no later than 23 June 11, 2024. The Letter must be lodged in .pdf format via email to 24 efile goddard@casd.uscourts.gov (not filed). Should a party choose to prepare a Letter, 25 the substance of the Settlement Conference Letter must comply fully with Judge Goddard’s 26 27 28 2 This deadline is not applicable to pretrial motions in limine. For further information regarding motions in limine, please refer to Judge Anello’s Civil Chambers Rules. 6 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG 1 Mandatory Settlement Conference Rules. All parties are ordered to read and to fully 2 comply with the Chambers Rules and Mandatory Settlement Conference Rules of 3 Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. 4 10. If appropriate, following the filing of an order ruling on a motion for summary 5 judgment or other dispositive pretrial motion, or in the event no such motion is filed, after 6 the expiration of the deadline set forth in paragraph 8, supra, Judge Anello will issue a 7 pretrial scheduling order setting a pretrial conference, trial date, and all related pretrial 8 deadlines. The parties must review and be familiar with Judge Anello’s Civil Chambers 9 Rules, which provide additional information regarding pretrial scheduling. 10 11. Should the parties not file any dispositive pretrial motions, they must notify 11 Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard via email (at efile goddard@casd.uscourts.gov) by 12 April 17, 2024. 13 12. 14 15 A post trial settlement conference before a magistrate judge may be held within 30 days of verdict in the case. 13. The dates and times set forth herein will not be modified except for good cause 16 shown. See, e.g., Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) 17 (“the focus of the [good cause] inquiry is upon the moving party’s reasons for seeking 18 modification. . . . If that party was not diligent, the inquiry should end.”). 19 14. Briefs or memoranda in support of or in opposition to any pending motion 20 must not exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length without leave of a district court judge. 21 No reply memorandum will exceed ten (10) pages without leave of a district court judge. 22 Briefs and memoranda exceeding ten (10) pages in length must have a table of contents 23 and a table of authorities cited. 24 25 26 27 15. Plaintiff’s counsel must serve a copy of this order on all parties that enter this case hereafter. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 1, 2023 28 7 3:23-cv-00467-MMA-AHG
]]>
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.
