Andersen v. National Association of Letter Carriers

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE SHANNON ANDERSEN, CASE NO. 2:20-cv-01678-RSM Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND 12 ORDER TO CONTINUE v. DEADLINES NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LETTER CARRIERS, a labor organization, and NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LETTER CARRIERS, BRANCH 79, a labor organization, and UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, and LOUIS DEJOY, POSTMASTER OF THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.

Plaintiff Shannon Andersen and Defendants National Association of Letter Carriers, National Association of Letter Carriers, Branch 79 and Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service, hereby jointly stipulate and move for a six-month extension of the remaining case deadlines, including the trial date.

A court may modify a schedule for good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). Continuing pretrial and trial dates is within the discretion of the trial judge. See King v. State of California, 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th Cir. 1986).

The parties submit there is good cause for an extension of the deadlines. Defendants contend that they lack basic information about plaintiff’s claims. Plaintiff responds that defendants are fully aware that the Defendant Union’s arbitration of Plaintiff’s removal grievance was not successful as the arbitrator concluded that the grievance was untimely, and thus, there has been no legal determination as to the lack of just cause for Plaintiff’s removal and end of her postal career.

5 As set forth in their motions to dismiss, defendants contend that plaintiff has not stated a claim against any of the defendants and that her complaint does not include essential information such as what contract provision she claims the Postal Service violated, or the basis for her claim that her labor union discriminated against her. Dkt. #8, 10. Those motions have been fully briefed by all parties; each has been diligent in doing so as their motions to dismiss were filed in January and February, 2021.

11 Defendants subsequently propounded written discovery requests to plaintiff to ascertain the basis for her claims and her claimed evidence in support. Although the deadline to respond to those requests has passed and defendants have not granted plaintiff an extension of time to respond, plaintiff has not produced any responses or documents to defendants’ discovery requests. Plaintiff states that due to several unanticipated events including the past two weeks’ need to provide support to a friend on a medically urgent situation, counsel anticipates getting an initial response on all sets of discovery by week’s end. Moreover, all parties had informally stayed depositions pending resolution of the motions to avoid unnecessary expenses. Therefore, good cause exists because defendants would suffer prejudice if they were required to comply with quickly approaching deadlines without knowing the nature of and basis for plaintiff’s claims.

21 Based on the foregoing, the parties agree to extend the current deadlines as follows: CURRENT DEADLINES NEW DEADLINES Disclosure of expert November 17, 2021 May 17, 2022 testimony under FRCP 26(a)(2) Deadline for filing motions December 17, 2021 June 17, 2022 related to discovery.

Any such motions shall be noted for consideration pursuant to LCR 7(d)(3) Discovery completed by January 18, 2022 July 18, 2022 All dispositive motions must February 15, 2022 August 15, 2022 be filed by and noted on the motion calendar no later than the fourth Friday thereafter (see LCR 7(d)) Mediation per LCR April 1, 2022 October 3, 2022 39.1(c)(3), if requested by the parties, held no later than All motions in limine must April 18, 2022 October 18, 2022 be filed by and noted on the motion calendar no later than the THIRD Friday thereafter Agreed pretrial order due May 4, 2022 November 4, 2022 Pretrial conference to be scheduled by the Court Trial briefs, proposed voir May 11, 2022 November 11, 2022 dire questions, jury instructions, neutral statement of the case, and trial exhibits due 5 DAY BENCH TRIAL May 16, 2022 November 16, 2022 1 IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

2 DATED this 28th day of October, 2021.

s/ Patricia S. Rose PATRICIA S. ROSE, WSBA #19046 1455 NW Leary Way, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98107 T: 206-622-8964 / F: 206-694-2695 E: [email protected] Attorney for Plaintiff

9 NICHOLAS W. BROWN United States Attorney s/ Sarah K. Morehead SARAH K. MOREHEAD, WSBA #29680 United States Attorney’s Office Stewart Street, Suite 5220 Seattle, WA 98101 T: 206-553-7970 E: [email protected] Attorney for Federal Defendants s/ Kate M. Swearengen KATE M SWEARENGEN, *Admitted Pro Hac Vice COHEN, WEISS AND SIMON LLP 900 Third Avenue, Suite 2100 New York, NY 10022-4869 T: (212) 563-4100 E: [email protected] Attorney for Union Defendants s/ Benjamin Berger BENJAMIN BERGER, WSBA #52909 BARNARD IGLITZIN & LAVITT LLP W Mercer St, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98119 T: (206) 257-6006 E: [email protected] Attorney for Union Defendants 1 ORDER 2 It is hereby so ORDERED that the deadlines are continued as set forth in the stipulation between the parties. A revised case scheduling order consistent with the stipulation of the parties will be issued.

DATED this 1st day of November, 2021.

8 A RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 10 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE