Case: DOC #1 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 1 Of 8 PAGEID 100261 IN RE: E. I. DU PONT DE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Case No. 2:13-md-2433 NEMOURS AND COMPANY C-8 PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION CHIEF JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers This document relates to: Kenneth Vigneron Sr. v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, Case No. 2:13-cv-136 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 18 Pretrial Schedule for Vigneron Trial Mr. Vigneron?s case is the third to be tried in this multidistrict litigation I. TRIAL AND FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCES A. 1. Trial Mr. Vigneron?s case is scheduled for trial on Mondav. November 14, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2. Trial counsel shall meet in the chambers of Chief Judge Sargus at 8:30 am. on each day of the trial. Final Pretrial Conferences The ?rst ?nal pretrial conference shall be held on Thursday. October 27., 2016, at 9:00 am. in the chambers of Chief Judge Sargus. a. The Court will rule on the motions in limz?ne. b. All trial counsel must appear. The second ?nal pretrial conference shall be held on Mondav. November 7, 2016 and Tuesday. November 8. 2016, at 9 am. in the chambers of Chief Judge Sargus. a. The Court will resolve the objections to the deposition designations Case: Doc 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 2 of 8 PAGEID 100262 and objections to the exhibits. b. All trial counsel must appear. 0. Attached to this CMO is the Court?s Final Pretrial Order The parties shall jointly submit CMO 12-A on or before Thursday, November 10, 2016. II. EXPERT WITNESSES A. Expert Reports 1. On or before August 8, 2016, Plaintiff shall designate, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, his expert witnesses. 2. On or before August 16, 2016, Defendant shall designate, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, its expert witnesses. 3. On or before August 22, 2016, Plaintiff shall designate its rebuttal expert witnesses, if any. B. Expert Discovery 1. Depositions of expert witnesses shall be completed by August 26, 2016. The parties have indicated that it is their intention that the depositions of Plaintiff?s expert witnesses be taken before Defendant's expert witnesses addressing the same subject matter. Nothing in this Order requires that all ofPlaintiff?s expert depositions must be completed before any Defendant expert depositions are undertaken. 2. If any of Plaintiff?s treating or diagnosing doctors who are deposed during the bellwether discovery period are later designated as testifying experts, then the designating party will be required to make timely expert disclosures for such witness and the other party may take that doctor?s deposition as an expert witness. 3. The limitations on expert discovery set?forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, including the provision of Rule limiting discovery with respect to draft reports, communications with experts, and depositions of consulting experts, shall apply. SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DA UBERT MOTIONS A. Court?s Previous Decisions The parties shall indicate in any summary judgment or Dauberr motion whether the Court ruled on the issue previously, whether they are moving to preserve, or whether they are Case: Doc 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 3 of 8 PAGEID 100263 asking for reconsideration because of new or different circumstances or other good cause. IV. B. l. 2. 3. Deadlines Plaintiff and Defendant shall ?le any motions for summary judgment, partial summary judgment, and/or Daubert motions on or before September 9.I 2016. The parties shall ?le any response to these motions by September 16, 2016. Reply briefs, if any, shall be filed on or before September 30, 2016. WITNESS LISTS A. l. 3. Deadlines Plaintiff shall serve his witness list by September 6. 2016. Defendant shall serve its witness list by September 13, 2016. Procedures Witnesses not included on a party?s witness list shall not be called at trial absent agreement by the parties or a showing of good cause as to why the witness was not included on the witness list. The parties will use good faith efforts to list persons whom they actually intend to call at trial (live or by deposition) based upon on a good faith best current intentions ?will call? list, and persons whom they currently believe are unlikely to be called but may be called on a ?may call? list. The parties shall also use good faith efforts to state whether each proposed witness will be called live, or by deposition. If either party discloses a fact witness who has not previously been deposed in this MDL, Leach, ennant, Rowe/Scott, Rhodes, or Little Hocking litigation, the opposing party shall be permitted to depose that witness. Any deposition conducted pursuant to this provision must be completed within an agreed upon time period within the framework of the existing deadlines and trial schedule. The ability to call rebuttal or sur-rebuttal witnesses will be governed by the Federal Rules. Nothing in this section shall prohibit Plaintiff from calling any witness during rebuttal or Defendant from calling any witness during sur-rebuttal as may be necessary provided that said witness has been deposed in this MDL, Leach, Tennant, Rowe/Scott, Rhodes, or Little Hocking litigation. Case: DOC #1 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 4 Of 8 PAGEID 100264 V. VI. DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS A. Deadlines Plaintiff shall serve page/line designations of deposition testimony by September 12., 2016. Defendant shall serve page/line counter?designations of deposition testimony; objections to Plaintiff?s page/line deposition designations; and af?rmative page/line designations of deposition testimony September 26, 2016. Plaintiff shall serve page/line counter-designations of deposition testimony; objections to Defendant?s page/line deposition counter?designations; and objections to defendant's af?rmative page/line designations by October 10, 2016. Defendant shall serve objections to Plaintiff?s page/line counter designations by October 24, 2016. All page/line designations, counter-designations, and objections shall be exchanged by the parties in an Excel format to be agreed on by the parties. Due to Court All unresolved objections must be submitted to the Court by November 3, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. EXHIBIT LISTS A. Deadlines Plaintiff shall serve an exhibit in a format to be agreed by the parties, which shall include all document production numbers (18., all known bates numbers, if applicable) and/or a description of the document (if there is no bates number) by October 3, 2016. An electronic copy of the exhibits shall also be provided on or before October 5, 2016, in a format to be agreed by the parties. Demonstrative exhibits shall be shown to Opposing counsel before being displayed to the jury. Defendant shall serve its exhibit list in a format to be agreed by the parties, which shall include all document production numbers (126., all known bates numbers, if applicable) or a description of the document (if there is no bates number), by October 10, 2016. An electronic COpy of the exhibits shall also be provided by October 12, 2016, in a format to be agreed by the parties. Defendant shall serve any objections to plaintiff?s exhibit list by October 19, 2016. Case: Doc 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 5 of 8 PAGEID 100265 VII. Plaintiff may serve any objections to Defendant?s exhibit list by October 24 2016. The parties shall have the right to supplement their exhibit list(s) in light of any and all ongoing discovery. Due to Court All unresolved objections must be submitted to the Court by November 3. 2016.. at 9:00 a.m. MOTIONS IN LIMINE A. Deadlines Motions in [imine shall be ?led by October 10, 2016. Responses in opposition to motions in h?mine shall be ?led by October 20, 2016. No reply is permitted without leave of Court, and only then for good cause. Procedures The following apply to all in liming motions: a. Index to motions in limine: If ?ling more than one in limine motion the party shall submit to the Court and to the opposing party an ?Index to Motions in Limine.? b. Attachments to motions in limine: If ?ling an in limine motion seeking an evidentiary ruling on a category of documents, testimony, or argument the party shall attach to the in limine motion document(s) or testimony on which it seeks a pre?trial ruling. A party responding shall attach any document or testimony that it deems is necessary for the Court to fully consider the evidentiary issue presented. 0. Page Limitation: Individual in Zimine motions and responses shall be limited to 10 double?Spaced pages; replies shall be limited to 6 double- spaced pages absent agreement of the parties or leave of Court. The parties shall indicate in any in Zimz?ne motion whether the Court ruled on the issue previously, whether they are moving to preserve, or whether they are asking Case: Doc 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 6 of 8 PAGEID 100266 for reconsideration because of new or different circumstances or other good cause. VOIR DIRE The parties shall exchange proposed voir dire questions on October 17, 2016. The parties shall submit their pr0posed voir dire questions to the Court by November 3, 2016. IX. JURY INSTRUCTIONS A. Jury Instructions from the Court The Court will prepare preliminary and general jury instructions. The parties may obtain an example of the Court?s general instructions from Debra Hepler, Chief Judge Sargus? Administrative Assistant. The parties shall concentrate their efforts on the case-Speci?c instructions. B. Preposed Jury Instructions from the Parties The parties shall submit jointly one set of prOposed jury instructions which contains the parties agreed upon case-speci?c instructions, and, in the event the parties cannot agree on an instruction, each party?s own individual proposed case-speci?c instruction. To this end, counsel shall adhere to the following procedures: 1. The parties shall serve their proposed jury instructions on each other on or before October 21, 2016. 2. Counsel then shall meet, confer and agree on proposed case?speci?c jury instructions. 3. If, after concerted good faith effort, the parties are unable to agree upon a particular case-speci?c instruction, each party shall propose its own version. Plaintiff?s version shall be presented ?rst, immediately followed by Defendant?s version of the jury instruction, complete with pinpoint citations to binding authority. Each version, Plaintiffs and Defendant?s, shall appear together on one page for ready comparison. Versions of longer instructions (over one page) shall appear one after another. A party may indicate its general objection to the giving of the proposed instruction. Case: DOC #1 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 7 Of 8 PAGEID 100267 4. Proposed case-speci?c jury instructions shall be submitted to the Court on or before November 4, 2016. All instructions shall be concise, understandable and neutral. Further, counsel shall at a minimum agree on a common index and the proposed instructions from all parties shall correspond to the index. For jury instructions concerning federal law, the Court prefers that the parties use the latest edition of Hon. Edward J. Devitt, Hon. Charles B. Blackmar, Michael A. Wolff, and Kevin F. O'Malley, Federal urv Practice and Instructions (West). For instructions on Ohio law, the Court prefers that the parties use the latest edition of Ohio Jury Instructions (Anderson). For instructions on West Virginia law, the Court prefers the latest version of the instructions published by Mathew Bender Company. The Court, however, welcomes any effort by counsel to make the instructions from these sources more direct, understandable, and concise. X. MODIFICATION The parties may by agreement modify the dates within this CMO that affect only the parties. All deadlines established for submissions to the Court may only be modi?ed for good cause and with the permission of the Court. XI. ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES The parties have agreed that, given the nature of this trial, including the extraordinary amount of documents and preparation, disclosure of live witnesses to be called to testify, and expected order, shall be made 48 hours in advance of the witness testifying. Any new witness for a Monday shall be disclosed on Friday before 9:00 pm. (Eastern Standard Time). Parties shall use good faith efforts to notify opposing counsel of witnesses to be presented by deposition designations 24 hours in advance of their use at trial, but the intent of this is not to Case: Doc 4588 Filed: 07/19/16 Page: 8 of 8 PAGEID 100268 preclude a party from utilizing a deposition designation if time allows for such use during the natural progression of the trial. IT IS SO ORDERED. A DATE EDMU . SARGUS, JR. CHIE TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE