Doe v. The University of Texas Health Science Center At San Antonio et al

Western District of Texas, txwd-5:2019-cv-00453

Scheduling Recommendations by Marcel Noujeim, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION MARY UTHSCSA-PM DOE § Plaintiff, § § V. § NO. 5:19-CV-00453-DAE § THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH § SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO § And MARCELNOUJEIM, § § Defendants. § ______________________________________________________________________________ SCHEDULING RECOMMENDATIONS ______________________________________________________________________________ The parties recommend that the following deadlines be entered in the scheduling order to control the course of this case: 1. A report on alternative dispute resolution in compliance with Local Rule CV-88 shall be filed by May 1, 2020. 2. The parties asserting claims for relief shall submit a written offer of settlement to opposing parties by April 15, 2020 and each opposing party shall respond, in writing, by May 1, 2020. 3. The parties shall file all motions to amend or supplement pleadings or to join additional parties by Plaintiff's recommendation of January 31, 2020, and Defendant UTHSCSA's recommendation of no amendment date. 4. All parties asserting claims for relief shall file their designation of potential witnesses, testifying experts, and proposed exhibits, and shall serve on all parties, but not file the materials required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) by May 15, 2020. Parties resisting claims for relief shall file their designation of potential witnesses, testifying experts, and proposed exhibits, and shall serve on all parties, but not file the materials required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) by June 15, 2020. All designations of rebuttal experts shall be designated within 14 days of receipt of the report of the opposing expert. 5. An objection to the reliability of an expert's proposed testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 shall be made by motion, specifically stating the basis for the objection and identifying the objectionable testimony, within thirty (30) days of receipt of the written report of the expert's proposed testimony, or within thirty (30) days of the expert's deposition, if a deposition is taken, whichever is later. 6. The parties shall complete all discovery on or before August 15, 2020. Counsel may by agreement continue discovery beyond the deadline, but there will be no intervention by the Court except in extraordinary circumstances, and no trial setting will be vacated because of information obtained in post-deadline discovery. 7. All dispositive motions shall be filed no later than October 1, 2020. Dispositive motions as defined in Local Rule CV-7(c) and responses to dispositive motions shall be limited to twenty (20) pages in length. Replies, if any, shall be limited to ten (10) pages in length in accordance with Local Rule CV-7(e). If the parties elect not to file dispositive motions, they must contact the courtroom deputy on or before this deadline in order to set a trial date. 8. If required, a hearing on dispositive motions will be set by the Court after all responses and replies have been filed. 9. The Court will set the case for trial by separate order. The order will establish trial type deadlines to include pretrial matters pursuant to Local Rule CV-16(e)-(g). 10. All of the parties who have appeared in the action conferred concerning the contents of the proposed scheduling order on December 18 and 19, and the parties have agreed to its contents except for number 3. The following positions and reasons are given by the parties for the disagreement as to the contents of the proposed scheduling order: Plaintiff wishes to have the ability to amend her complaint one more time, thus having a Third Amended Complaint on file. Defendant UTHSCSA believes that since Plaintiff has amended twice, and declined the Court's invitation to amend after its order partially granting Defendant UHSCSA's motion to dismiss, Plaintiff should not have an opportunity to amend a third time. Respectfully submitted, KEN PAXTON Attorney General of Texas JEFFREY C. MATEER First Assistant Attorney General DARREN L. MCCARTY Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation THOMAS A. ALBRIGHT Chief, General Litigation Division /s/ Glorieni M. Azeredo GLORIENI M. AZEREDO Texas Bar No. 24077840 Assistant Attorney General General Litigation Division P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 (512) 475-1969 | FAX: (512) 320-0667 Glorieni.Azeredo@oag.texas.gov ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 20, 2019, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served via the Court's CM/ECF system to all counsel of record: Terry P. Gorman, Esq. tgorman@school-law.co 901 Mopac Expressway South, Suite 300 Austin, TX 78746 Phone: (972) 235-4700 Fax: (512) 597-1455 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF /s/ Glorieni M. Azeredo GLORIENI M. AZEREDO Assistant Attorney General