Opinion
Case No.: 2:11-cv-01545-GEB-GGH
07-17-2012
THOMAS BOTELL, JENNIFER BOTELL, individually, and B.B. and K.B., minors, by and through their Guardian ad Litem, THOMAS BOTELL Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant,
ROBERT A. BUCCOLA, ESQ. / SBN: 112880 STEVEN M. CAMPORA, ESQ. / SBN: 110909 CATIA G. SARAIVA, ESQ. / SBN: 232479 RONALD J. MARTINEZ, ESQ. / SBN: 262628 DREYER BABICH BUCCOLA WOOD CAMPORA, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ROBERT A. BUCCOLA, ESQ. / SBN: 112880
STEVEN M. CAMPORA, ESQ. / SBN: 110909
CATIA G. SARAIVA, ESQ. / SBN: 232479
RONALD J. MARTINEZ, ESQ. / SBN: 262628
DREYER BABICH BUCCOLA WOOD CAMPORA, LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
JOINT MOTION AND ORDER TO
MODIFY THE STATUS (PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING) ORDER [DOC. 26]
Judge: Hon. Garland E. Burrell
Pursuant to Local Rule 144, and for good cause, Plaintiffs and Defendant jointly move the Court for an Order modifying the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order ("Scheduling Order") [Doc. 26] to extend the dates for expert disclosures. In support of their motion, the parties, through their respective counsel, state as follows:
1. Under the current Scheduling Order discovery is due to be completed by February 1, 2013. The parties are actively engaging in discovery in a good faith effort to complete discovery in a timely manner. Numerous depositions have been taken, and written discovery is progressing.
2. It has become evident to the parties that additional discovery must be completed before they can prepare their initial expert witness disclosures, which are currently due to be filed on August 3, 2012.
3. Consequently, there is also insufficient time under the current Scheduling Order for preparation of rebuttal expert witness disclosures by September 7, 2012.
4. Pursuant to Local Rule 144(b), the parties have not previously sought or obtained any extensions of the pretrial dates in this matter.
5. The proposed amended dates for expert disclosures will not require a change in any other dates set out in the Scheduling Order. The Final Pretrial Conference date of June 10, 2013 and the Trial date of September 10, 2013 remain unchanged under this proposed modification.
6. THEREFORE, THE PARTIES request the following modifications of the Scheduling Order:
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Event ¦Current Date ¦Proposed Date ¦ +---------------------------------+-----------------+------------------¦ ¦Initial Expert Witness Disclosure¦August 3, 2012 ¦December 3, 2012 ¦ +---------------------------------+-----------------+------------------¦ ¦Rebuttal Expert Disclosure ¦September 7, 2012¦January 9, 2013 ¦ +---------------------------------+-----------------+------------------¦ ¦Expert Discovery Cutoff ¦None ¦March 7, 2013 ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
For each of the foregoing reasons, the parties agree and respectfully submit that good cause exists for the Court to modify the Scheduling Order to provide the parties sufficient time to disclose expert and rebuttal expert witnesses, to prepare expert reports, and to adequately conduct the remaining discovery necessary to prosecute and defend this matter.
DREYER BABICH BUCCOLA WOOD CAMPORA, LLP
By: _________________________
STEVEN M. CAMPORA
CATIA G. SARAIVA
RONALD J. MARTINEZ
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
By: _________________________
J. EARLENE GORDON
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED, that the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order [Doc. 26] is modified as follows:
1. Each party shall comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) and (C)'s initial expert disclosure requirements on or before December 3, 2012;
2. The time for any contradictory and/or rebuttal expert disclosure authorized under Rule 26(a)(2)(D)(ii) shall be January 9, 2013; and
3. Expert discovery shall be completed by March 7, 2013.
_________________________
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge