From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tapia v. NaphCare Inc.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Oct 26, 2023
2:22-cv-01141 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 26, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-01141

10-26-2023

JAVIER TAPIA, Plaintiff, v. NAPHCARE, INC., and PIERCE COUNTY, Defendants.

David A. Perez, WSBA No. 43959 Juliana Bennington, WSBA No. 60357 Jedidiah K.R. Blake, WSBA No. 59610 Perkins Coie LLP Jacob Dean (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Perkins Coie LLP Attorneys for Defendant NaphCare, Inc. s/ Kristal M. Cowger Kristal M. Cowger, WSBA # 43079 Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney Attorney for Defendant Pierce County s/ Ryan Dreveskrach Ryan Dreveskracht, WSBA No. 42593 Corinne Sebren, WSBA No. 58777 Galanda Broadman, PLLC Attorneys for Plaintiff


David A. Perez, WSBA No. 43959

Juliana Bennington, WSBA No. 60357

Jedidiah K.R. Blake, WSBA No. 59610

Perkins Coie LLP

Jacob Dean (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

Perkins Coie LLP

Attorneys for Defendant NaphCare, Inc.

s/ Kristal M. Cowger

Kristal M. Cowger, WSBA # 43079

Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney

Attorney for Defendant Pierce County s/ Ryan Dreveskrach

Ryan Dreveskracht, WSBA No. 42593

Corinne Sebren, WSBA No. 58777

Galanda Broadman, PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER TO AMEND THE CASE SCHEDULE

HONORABLE KYMBERLY K. EVANSON JUDGE

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Local Civil Rule 16(b)(6), all parties in this action jointly move the Court for entry of an order extending the remaining case deadlines. The parties believe that there is good cause to extend the trial date, and related pretrial deadlines, as the proposed schedule will ensure efficiency and conserve judicial resources.

“The decision to modify a scheduling order is within the broad discretion of the district court,” and the Court may do so on a showing of good cause. White v. Ethicon, Inc., No. 20-952, 2022 WL 596407, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 28, 2022); Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(4); see also LCR 16(b)(6). The good cause standard “primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking amendment.” Ginzkey v. Nat'l Sec. Corp., No. 18-1773, 2022 WL 1110976, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 10, 2022) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992)). Good cause exists where the “schedule . . . cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the parties seeking the extension.” Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609 (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 advisory committee's notes (1983 amendment)). The rule is intended to “accomplish effective pretrial procedures and to avoid wasting the time of the parties, counsel, and the court.” LCR 16(b)(4).

The Court's Scheduling Order does not explicitly set forth deadlines for expert discovery and Daubert motions. Dkt. No. 50 at 1. Good cause exists to extend the deadlines for dispositive motions and other pretrial deadlines as the parties' ability to prepare motions for summary judgment, necessarily depends on the parties' ability to develop a complete factual record and assess the adequacy of the expert testimony. Accordingly, the extension will “accomplish effective pretrial procedures,” and ensure the efficiency of trial, which will, in turn, “avoid wasting the time of the parties, counsel, and the court.” LCR 16(b)(4).

Further, Defendants NaphCare and Pierce County believe good cause exists to sequence Daubert motions and motions for summary judgment so that the Court can determine what expert opinions are admissible before the parties submit dispositive motions, which will rely heavily on expert opinions. Should the current schedule not provide the Court time to resolve the Daubert motions in advance of the deadline to file motions for summary judgment, Defendants reserve their right to request a further extension of the deadline to file motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff does not believe such sequencing is necessary or beneficial.

Good cause, therefore, exists to extend the deadlines for dispositive motions, and extend the remaining case deadlines as follows:

Current Date

Proposed New Date

Deadline for Expert Disclosures and Reports

March 15, 2024

Deadline for Rebuttal Expert Disclosures and Reports

April 15, 2024

Discovery Cut-Off

March 15, 2024

May 15, 2024

Deadline to File Daubert Motions

April 15, 2024

June 10, 2024

Mediation to be Completed

April 1, 2024

July 1, 2024

Deadline to File Motions for,Summary Judgment

April 15, 2024

September 16, 2024

Motions in Limine

July 5, 2024

November 29, 2024

Pretrial Order

July 5, 2024

November 29, 2024

Proposed Verdict Forms, Voir Dire,and Jury Instructions'

July 8, 2024

December 2, 2024

Trial Briefs July

11, 2024

December 5, 2024

Jury Trial July

15, 2024

December 9, 2024

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Tapia v. NaphCare Inc.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Oct 26, 2023
2:22-cv-01141 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 26, 2023)
Case details for

Tapia v. NaphCare Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JAVIER TAPIA, Plaintiff, v. NAPHCARE, INC., and PIERCE COUNTY, Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Oct 26, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-01141 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 26, 2023)