Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 5, 2023

Fareportal, Inc. v. HNA Group Co., LTD.

Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Docket
4:21-cv-02841
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscoveryPro Se
In one sentence

In Fareportal v. HNA, Judge Rogers revised the case schedule, ordered settlement talks, and set a jury trial date.

Who this affects

The parties and counsel in Fareportal, Inc. v. HNA Group (International) Co., LTD., including defendants Mr. Kumar and Mr. Chen if they appear without lawyers in the circumstances described by the order.

What happened

Fareportal, Inc. v. HNA Group (International) Co., LTD. concerns a revised schedule for the pending case. The order does not describe or decide the parties’ underlying claims.

Judge Rogers set deadlines for non-expert discovery, expert reports and discovery, dispositive and Daubert motions, pretrial filings, and the pretrial conference. The order also requires the parties to participate in settlement discussions before a magistrate judge and sets a jury trial for November 18, 2024.

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued the revised scheduling and pretrial order on December 5, 2023. The order also states that certain defendants appearing without lawyers must receive notice about how to oppose a summary-judgment motion if Fareportal files one against them.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Fareportal, Inc. v. HNA Group Co., LTD. · No. 4:21-cv-02841
Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Date
Dec. 5, 2023

Nature of the Order

This is a revised scheduling and pretrial order in a pending civil case. It sets case-management deadlines and trial dates; it does not decide the merits of the parties’ claims.

Deadlines and Trial Schedule

The Court set the following dates:

- Non-expert discovery closes March 29,

  1. - Opening expert reports are due April 29, 2024, and rebuttal reports are due May 20,
  2. The order requires all retained and non-retained experts to provide written reports complying with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B). - Expert discovery closes June 17,
  3. - Dispositive motions and motions under Daubert—motions challenging expert testimony—must be filed by July 15,
  4. - A further case-management conference is scheduled for September 9, 2024, at 3:00 p.m. - The compliance deadline is October 11, 2024, at 9:01 a.m., and pretrial filings are due October 18,
  5. - The pretrial conference is scheduled for November 1, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. - A jury trial is scheduled to begin November 18, 2024, at 8:00 a.m.

The order requires trial counsel to meet and confer at least 21 days before the pretrial conference. The parties must file a one-page joint statement five business days before the compliance deadline confirming compliance with the Court’s pretrial requirements or explaining any failure to comply. If the parties complete the required compliance, the compliance deadline will be vacated. The Court states that failure to comply may result in sanctions or another conference.

Settlement Conference

The Court ordered the parties to participate in a mandatory settlement conference before a magistrate judge. A magistrate judge will be randomly assigned and will contact the parties to schedule the conference.

Defendants Appearing Without Lawyers

The order states that, if Fareportal files a summary-judgment motion against pro se defendant Mr. Kumar or against Mr. Chen to the extent he is appearing without a lawyer in that context, Ninth Circuit authority requires the defendants to receive notice, when the motion is filed, explaining what they must do to oppose it. The Court also advised defendants appearing without lawyers that the Legal Help Center provides basic legal information and assistance but does not represent parties.

Disposition

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued the revised schedule and related instructions. The order contains no ruling on the underlying claims or defenses.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.