Case 1:19-cv-01125-LJO-JLT Document 17 Filed 11/12/19 Page 1 of 6

1 RODNEY S. DIGGS, Esq. (SBN 274459)

[email protected]
2 IVIE, McNEILL & WYATT
444 S. Flower Street
3 Suite 1800
Los Angeles, CA 90071
4 Tel: (213) 489-0028
Fax: (213) 489-0552
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff TAMETRIA NASH-PERRY
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7

8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9 TAMETRIA NASH-PERRY, CASE NO.: 1:18−cv−01512−LJO−JLT

an individual
10 Plaintiff, AMENDED ORDER CONSOLIDATING
CASES AND MODIFYING THE NASH-
11 vs. PERRY SCHEDULING ORDER

12 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, OFFICER

ALEJANDRO PATINO, and DOES 1-10,
13 Inclusive,

14 Defendants. CASE NO.: 1:19−cv−01125 LJO JLT

__________________________________
15
JASON OKAMOTO, et al,
16
Plaintiffs,
17
v.
18
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, et al.,
19
Defendants.
20

21
TO THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT AND TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL
22
OF RECORD:
23
The parties, TAMETRIA NASH-PERRY, Plaintiff in the matter of Nash-Perry v. City of
24
Bakersfield, et al. Case No. 1:18-CV-01512-LJO-JLT, Jason Okamoto and Z.S., Plaintiffs in the
25
matter of Okamoto, et al. v. City of Bakersfield, et al., Case No. 1:19-CV-01125-DAD-JLT, and
26
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD and OFFICER ALEJANDRO PATINO, Defendants in both matters,
27
1
28 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND CONTINUE
TRIAL
 Case 1:19-cv-01125-LJO-JLT Document 17 Filed 11/12/19 Page 2 of 6

1
by and through their respective counsel of record, have conferred and hereby stipulate to
2
consolidate cases Nash-Perry v. City of Bakersfield, et al. and Okamoto, et al. v. City of
3
Bakersfield, et al. pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Parties also
4 hereby stipulate to continue trial from January 12, 2021 to July 13, 2021.
5

6 JOINT STIPULATION
7 WHEREAS, presently pending in this Court are two related actions identified below:
8 1. Nash-Perry v. City of Bakersfield, et al., United States District Court, Eastern District
9 of California, Case No. 1:18-CV-01512-LJO-JLT “Nash-Perry;” and

10 2. Okamoto, et al. v. City of Bakersfield, et al., United States District Court, Eastern

11 District of California, Case No. 1:19-CV-01125-JLO-JLT (“Okamoto”);

12 WHEREAS, both cases arise out of the same incident which occurred on April 19, 2018;

13 WHEREAS, Decedent’s mother Tametria Nash-Perry filed her initial complaint on

October 31, 2018, asserting constitutional claims on her own behalf as well as constitutional,
14
state law and survivorship claims on behalf of Christopher Okamoto (“Decedent”) as his mother.
15
Plaintiff Nash-Perry also alleges she has the right to recover as successor in interest to Decedent
16
and has named Decedent’s father Jason Okamoto as a nominal defendant in her operative
17
complaint;
18
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2019, Decedent’s father Jason Okamoto (“Mr. Okamoto”)
19
and alleged child Z.S. filed their Complaint for Damages against Defendants alleging
20
constitutional claims on their own behalf and also assert state law and survivorship claims on
21
behalf Decedent, both in the individual capacity and as successors in interest to Decedent;
22 WHEREAS, Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits a court to
23 consolidate actions pending before it if those actions involve a “common question of law or fact”
24 and a Court may consider several factors that would affect the litigation including the burden on
25 parties, witnesses, judicial resources, the risk of inconsistent adjudications, the potential for
26 prejudice, and the risk of delaying trial. Johnson v. Celotex Corp., 899 F.2d 1281, 1285 (2nd Cir.
27
2
28 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND CONTINUE
TRIAL
 Case 1:19-cv-01125-LJO-JLT Document 17 Filed 11/12/19 Page 3 of 6

1
1990); Cantrell v. GAF Corp., 999 F.2d 1007, 1011 (6th Cir. 1993); Malcolm v. National
2
Gypsum Co., 995 F.2d 346, 350 (2nd Cir. 1993); Mills v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 886 F.2d 758,
3
762 (5th Cir. 1989);
4 WHEREAS, the Parties now seek to consolidate the above related actions pursuant to
5 F.R.C.P. 42 because each action asserts substantially the same claims and raise substantially the
6 same questions of fact and law regarding liability and damages;
7 WHEREAS, the instant actions of Nash-Perry and Okamoto have both been properly
8 filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California and involve the exact same
9 facts and circumstances, share many of the same causes of action, would require the same legal

10 analysis, and as such, satisfy the only requirement for consolidation under Rule 42(a);

11 WHEREAS, consolidating these two cases would clearly serve the interests of justice:

12 increases judicial efficiency, avoids duplicative evidence, procedures, and inconsistent

13 adjudications, precludes waste, and alleviates potential burdens to the court and all parties
involved. Furthermore, since both Nash-Perry and Okamoto allege survivorship actions, where
14
there can be only one, this will allow a final determination as to the propriety of such claims by
15
each Plaintiff at the same time thus further substantiating the appropriateness of consolidating
16
these actions;
17
WHEREAS, trial in the Nash-Perry matter is scheduled for January 12, 2021 based on
18
the Scheduling Order [Dkt. 19]
19
WHEREAS, the Scheduling Conference in Okamoto is currently scheduled to take place
20
on November 13, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. and thus, a Scheduling Order has not been entered; and
21
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that additional time will be needed in order to engage in
22 meaningful discovery efforts and litigate this matter in light of the requested consolidation.
23 STIPULATION
24 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the Parties hereto through their
25 respective attorneys of record:
26 1. The Nash-Perry and Okamoto cases will be consolidated;
27
3
28 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND CONTINUE
TRIAL
 Case 1:19-cv-01125-LJO-JLT Document 17 Filed 11/12/19 Page 4 of 6

1
2. The Scheduling Order in Nash-Perry shall be modified as follows and shall govern
2
the consolidated case as follows:
3

4 DEADLINE/HEARING CURRENT REQUESTED

DATE DATE
5
Initial Disclosures None 11/14/2019
6 (Okamoto v. City of Bakersfield)
7 Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff 03/30/2020 11/25/2020
8 Expert Witness Disclosure 04/13/2020 12/07/2020
9 Rebuttal Expert Witness Disclosure 05/11/2020 01/04/2021
10 Expert Discovery Cutoff 06/08/2020 01/19/2021

11 File Non-Dispositive Motions 06/22/2020 02/03/2021

12 Hear Non-Dispositive Motions 07/20/2020 03/05/2021

13 File Dispositive Motions 08/05/2020 03/15/2021

Hear Dispositive Motions 09/16/2020 04/26/2021
14
Settlement Conference 01/10/2020 05/14/2021
15
Pre-Trial Conference 11/12/2020 06/14/2021
16
Trial 01/12/2021 07/13/2021
17

18
3. The Scheduling Conference in Okamoto currently scheduled to take place on
19
November 13, 2019 at 8:30 a.m shall be vacated.
20
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
21

22 Dated: November 12, 2019 IVIE, McNEILL & WYATT

23 /s/ Rodney S. Diggs

By:____________________________________
24
RODNEY S. DIGGS
25 Attorney for Plaintiff Nash-Perry

26
Dated: November 12, 2019 CHAIN COHN STILES
27
4
28 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND CONTINUE
TRIAL
 Case 1:19-cv-01125-LJO-JLT Document 17 Filed 11/12/19 Page 5 of 6

1
/s/ Matt Clark
2 By:____________________________________
MATT CLARK
3 Attorney for Plaintiffs Okamato and Z.S.
4

5 Dated: November 12, 2019 MARDEROSIAN & COHEN

6 /s/ Heather S. Cohen

7 By:_______________________________________
HEATHER S. COHEN
8 Attorney for Defendants above-named.
9
10 ORDER

11 Based upon the stipulation of the parties, the Court ORDERS:

12 1. Nash-Perry v. City of Bakersfield, et al., United States District Court, Eastern

13 District of California, Case No. 1:18-cv-01512 LJO JLT and Okamoto, et al. v. City of
Bakersfield, et al., United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 1:19-cv-
14
01125 LJO JLT are CONSOLIDATED FOR ALL PURPOSES. The new case number for all
15
filings is 1:18-cv-01512 LJO JLT;
16
2. The parties SHALL comply with the case schedule issued in Nash-Perry v. City
17
of Bakersfield, et al., and which is modified as follows:
18
a. The parties SHALL make their initial disclosure no later than November
19
14, 2019;
20
b. The parties SHALL complete all non-expert discovery no later than
21
November 25, 2020 and all expert discovery no later than January 19, 2021. The parties
22
SHALL disclose their experts no later than December 7, 2020 and any rebuttal experts no
23 later than January 4, 2021;
24 c. The parties SHALL file non-dispositive motions, if any, no later than
25 February 3, 2021. These motions will be heard no later than March 5, 2021;
26
27
5
28 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND CONTINUE
TRIAL
 Case 1:19-cv-01125-LJO-JLT Document 17 Filed 11/12/19 Page 6 of 6

1
d. The parties SHALL file dispositive motions, if any, no later than March
2
15, 2021. These motions will be heard no later than April 29, 2021;
3
e. The settlement conference is CONTINUED to May 14, 2021 at 9:00 a.m.
4 f. The pretrial conference is CONTINUED to June 24, 2021 at 8:30 a.m.;
5 g. The trial is CONTINUED to August 24, 2021 at 8:30 a.m.
6 3. With the stipulation to consolidate the matters, the motion to consolidate (Doc.
7 35) filed in the Nash-Perry matter is MOOT;
8 4. With the consolidation for all purposes, the motion to join heirs (Doc. 8) filed in
9 the Okamoto matter is MOOT;

10 5. The Scheduling Conference in Okamoto, et al. v. City of Bakersfield, et al. Case

11 No. 1:19-cv-01125 LJO JLT currently set on November 13, 2019 is VACATED.

12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
Dated: November 12, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
14
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26
27
6
28 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND CONTINUE
TRIAL