Joint Motion for Entry of Amended Scheduling Order Regarding Phase Two Discovery and Dispositive Motions (Tyler Adams et al.) — Together Employees v. Mass General Brigham Incorporated (Dkt. 265)

Summary

A joint motion filed January 28, 2025 as Document 265 in Tyler Adams et al. v. Mass General Brigham Incorporated, Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-11686-FDS, in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Plaintiffs Robin Meadows, Kathleen Fusco, and Michael Saccoccio (the "Represented Plaintiffs") and the defendant ask the Court to enter an amended scheduling order for Phase Two of fact discovery, expert discovery and Phase Two dispositive motions. The motion proposes that non-expert discovery be completed by May 30, 2025, expert discovery by August 29, 2025, and Phase 2 dispositive motions be filed by October 3, 2025. It also proposes that each deposition noticed by the defendant be limited to seven (7) hours. The filing includes a proposed amended scheduling order.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Joint Motion for Entry of Amended Scheduling Order Regarding Phase Two Discovery and Dispositive Motions (Tyler Adams et al.) — Together Employees v. Mass General Brigham Incorporated (Dkt. 265).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/gov-uscourts-mad-238919-265-0-3735265a40/, SHA-256 427a8b3f27764060f57babaaa2729e53640e1a12598d5a66f49c4b147062fbc5.

Full text

Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 1 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

TYLER ADAMS, KATHLEEN FUSCO,
ROBIN MEADOWS, MICHAEL
SACCOCCIO, MICHELLE ORFANOS,
ROSEANN McNAMARA, JAMIE
STEVERMAN, and SARAH SHULMAN,

Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-11686-FDS

MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM
INCORPORATED,

Defendant.

JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER REGARDING
PHASE TWO OF FACT DISCOVERY, EXPERT DISCOVERY AND PHASE TWO
DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

Plaintiffs Robin Meadows, Kathleen Fusco, and Michael Saccoccio (the “Represented

Plaintiffs”) and Defendant, Mass General Brigham Incorporated (collectively, the “Parties”),

submit this Joint Motion for Entry of an Amended Scheduling Order Regarding Phase Two of

Fact Discovery, Expert Discovery and Phase Two Dispositive Motions. In the interests of a fair,

balanced, and efficient resolution of this action, and in recognition of the intervening

developments that have occurred since this Court’s entry of the initial Phase Two Scheduling

Order, see ECF No. 178, the Parties jointly move the Court to adopt the following Proposed

Amended Scheduling Order.

315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 2 of 9

I. DEPOSITIONS

a. Absent agreement in writing of both the deponent and Defendant to conduct a

remote proceeding, all depositions noticed by Defendant shall take place in person, and each

deposition shall be limited to seven (7) hours.

b. Defendant may, without leave of Court, take the deposition of each remaining

Plaintiff to this action who has not yet given a deposition during Phase 2 of discovery.

c. Any Plaintiff who wishes to attend a deposition that he or she did not notice shall

provide Defendant’s counsel with reasonable notice of his or her intent to attend, and in no case

shall such Plaintiff provide fewer than three days’ notice of his or her attendance.

d. The parties’ positions differ as to whether the Represented Plaintiffs can notice

additional depositions of MGB, apart from those Plaintiffs conducted during Phase 1 of

discovery in this action. The parties have conferred on this issue and anticipate they will be able

to come to a reasonable agreement on the issue. Should the Represented Plaintiffs seek to notice

any such depositions, Represented Plaintiffs’ counsel shall promptly so advise Defendant’s

counsel, and the parties shall confer in a good faith attempt to reach agreement concerning the

proposed deposition(s). If the parties reach an impasse, then any party may thereafter file a

motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) or Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 as appropriate. No depositions,

other than those discussed and expressly permitted herein, are allowed without leave of Court.

Represented Plaintiffs’ failure to file a motion under this section prior to the close of non-expert

discovery may result in denial of leave to take the requested deposition(s).

The claims of Plaintiffs who fail to reasonably cooperate in the scheduling of their

depositions, or fail to appear without at least 24 hours’ prior notice or without good cause, shall

be subject to prompt dismissal with prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2). A party who fails to

provide full and complete written responses, produce requested documents, or seasonably

2
315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 3 of 9

supplement prior discovery responses shall be subject to prompt dismissal with prejudice; no

additional warnings or motion practice shall be required. The Parties shall jointly report to the

Court if one or more Plaintiffs are not in compliance with this portion of the Order and

thereafter any party may request dismissal with prejudice.

II. NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINE

All non-expert discovery shall be completed by May 30, 2025.

III. EXPERT DISCOVERY

All expert discovery shall be completed by August 29, 2025. The following deadlines

shall govern expert discovery:

a. The Parties’ expert disclosures and reports, if any, shall be served on or before

June 13, 2025.

b. The Parties’ rebuttal experts and reports, if any, shall be served on or before July

18, 2025.

c. Expert depositions shall be completed by August 29, 2025.

IV. PHASE 2 SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DAUBERT MOTIONS

a. Phase 2 dispositive motions, such as motions for summary judgment or partial

summary judgment, and any related motions, e.g., Daubert motions, shall be filed by October 3,

2025.

b. Oppositions to dispositive and any related motions shall be filed within 30 days

after service of the motion(s).

c. Reply briefs shall be filed within 21 days after service of any Opposition, and

may be filed without leave of Court.

3
315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 4 of 9

d. No later than the deadline for completion of expert discovery, the Parties shall

submit a joint proposal outlining any additional procedures that they propose to govern the

briefing of Phase 2 dispositive and related motions. Counsel for the Parties shall confer no fewer

than fourteen (14) days in advance of the expert discovery deadline regarding their proposals for

briefing of summary judgment, and whether the Parties anticipate the filing of any Daubert

motions in connection with Phase 2 summary judgment. To the extent areas of disagreement

remain after conferral, the Parties shall set forth their respective positions in the joint submission.

e. Within seven (7) days of service of the Parties’ joint submission regarding

summary judgment procedures, any self-represented Plaintiff who objects thereto, in whole or in

part, may serve and file a submission that clearly and succinctly states the self-represented

party’s areas of disagreement with the Parties’ proposed Phase 2 summary judgment procedures.

After consideration of all proposals timely submitted, the Court will issue an appropriate order.

V. PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS

Unless otherwise stated in the Court’s Order, the procedural provisions of this Court’s

December 17, 2021 Scheduling Order, see ECF No. 56, shall remain in effect.

4
315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 5 of 9

Dated: January 28, 2025 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/Jack R. Spitz /s/ Dawn R. Solowey
Jack R. Spitz (Pro hac vice) Lynn A. Kappelman (BBO# 642017)
jspitz@sirillp.com Katherine E. Perrelli (BBO# 549820)
Christina Xenides Kristin McGurn (BBO# 559687)
cxenides@sirillp.com Dawn Reddy Solowey (BBO# 567757)
Siri & Glimstad LLP SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
1005 Congress Ave., Ste. 925-C36 Seaport East
Austin, TX 78701 Two Seaport Lane, Suite 1200
Tel.: (224) 263-7422 Boston, MA 02210-2028
Fax: (646) 417-5967 kperrelli@seyfarth.com
lkappelman@seyfarth.com
COUNSEL FOR ROBIN MEADOWS and kmcgurn@seyfarth.com
KATHLEEN FUSCO dsolowey@seyfarth.com
TEL: (617) 946-4800
FAX: (617) 946-4801
/s/Richard Chambers
Richard Chambers (BBO# )
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT
richard@chamberslaw.com
Chambers Law Office
220 Broadway, Suite 404
Lynnfield, MA 01940
Tel.:
Fax:

COUNSEL FOR MICHAEL SACCOCCIO

5
315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 6 of 9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 28, 2025 this document was filed through the CM/ECF
system will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of
Electronic Filing (NEF).

/s/ Dawn R. Solowey
Dawn R. Solowey

6
315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 7 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

TYLER ADAMS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-11686-FDS

MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM
INCORPORATED,

Defendant.

[PROPOSED] AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER REGARDING PHASE TWO OF
FACT DISCOVERY, EXPERT DISCOVERY, AND PHASE TWO DISPOSITIVE
MOTIONS

SAYLOR, C. J.

This Amended Scheduling Order is intended to provide a reasonable timeframe for

completion of remaining Phase 2 of discovery and dispositive motion practice in order to help

ensure a fair and just resolution of this matter without undue expense or delay.

Timetable for Phase Two Discovery and Motion Practice

It is hereby ORDERED as follows:

I. Depositions. All Phase 2 depositions that have not taken place as of the date of
the entry of this Order, other than expert depositions, must be completed by May 30, 2025.

a. Absent agreement in writing of both the deponent and Defendant to conduct a
remote proceeding, all depositions noticed by Defendant shall take place in person, and each
deposition shall be limited to seven (7) hours.

b. Defendant may, without leave of Court, take the deposition of each remaining
Plaintiff to this action who has not yet given a deposition during Phase 2 of discovery.

c. Should the Represented Plaintiffs seek to notice any depositions, Represented
Plaintiffs’ counsel shall promptly so advise Defendant’s counsel, and the parties shall confer in a

7
315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 8 of 9

good faith attempt to reach agreement concerning the proposed deposition(s). If the parties reach
an impasse, then any party may thereafter file a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) or Fed.
R. Civ. P. 37 as appropriate. No depositions, other than those discussed and expressly permitted
herein, are allowed without leave of Court. Represented Plaintiffs’ failure to file a motion under
this section prior to the close of non-expert discovery may result in denial of leave to take the
requested deposition(s).

d. Any Plaintiff who wishes to attend a deposition that he or she did not notice shall
provide counsel for the noticing party with reasonable notice of his or her intent to attend, and in
no case shall such Plaintiff provide fewer than three days’ notice of his or her attendance.

e. No other depositions are permitted without leave of Court, and only for good
cause shown.

II. Sanctions for Failure to Provide Deposition or Supplement Discovery. The
claims of Plaintiffs who fail to reasonably cooperate in the scheduling of their depositions, or fail
to appear without at least 24 hours’ prior notice or without good cause, shall be subject to prompt
dismissal with prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2). A party who fails to provide full and
complete written responses, produce requested documents, or seasonably supplement prior
discovery responses shall be subject to prompt dismissal with prejudice; no additional warnings
or motion practice shall be required. The Parties shall jointly report to the Court if one or more
Plaintiffs are not in compliance with this portion of the Order and thereafter any party may
request dismissal of the non-compliant party with prejudice.

III. Close of Phase 2 of Fact Discovery. All non-expert discovery shall be
completed by May 30, 2025.

IV. Expert Discovery. All expert discovery shall be completed by August 29, 2025.

a. The Parties’ expert disclosures and reports, if any, shall be served on or before
June 13, 2025.

b. The Parties’ rebuttal experts and reports, if any, shall be served on or before July
18, 2025.

c. Expert depositions shall be completed by August 29, 2025.

V. Phase 2 Summary Judgment and Daubert Motions.

a. Phase 2 dispositive motions, such as motions for summary judgment or partial
summary judgment, and any related motions, e.g., Daubert motions, shall be filed by October 3,
2025.

b. Oppositions to dispositive and any related motions shall be filed within 30 days
after service of the motion(s).

8
315851947v.2
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 265 Filed 01/28/25 Page 9 of 9

c. Reply briefs shall be filed within 21 days after service of any Opposition, and
may be filed without leave of Court.

d. No later than the deadline for completion of expert discovery, the Parties shall
submit a joint proposal outlining any additional procedures that they propose to govern the
briefing of Phase 2 dispositive and related motions. Counsel for the Parties shall confer no fewer
than fourteen (14) days in advance of the expert discovery deadline regarding their proposals for
briefing of summary judgment, and whether the Parties anticipate the filing of any Daubert
motions in connection with Phase 2 summary judgment. To the extent areas of disagreement
remain after conferral, the Parties shall set forth their respective positions in the joint submission.

e. The Parties shall serve a copy of their joint submission for Phase 2 summary
judgment procedures on all self-represented Plaintiffs who are not registered for electronic filing
in this matter. Within seven (7) days of service of the Parties’ joint submission regarding
summary judgment procedures, any self-represented Plaintiff who objects thereto, in whole or in
part, may serve and file a submission that clearly and succinctly states with specificity the self-
represented party’s areas of disagreement with the Parties’ proposed Phase 2 summary judgment
procedures. After consideration of all proposals timely submitted, the Court will issue an
appropriate order.

VI. Procedural Provisions. Unless otherwise stated in this Order, the procedural
provisions of this Court’s December 17, 2021 Scheduling Order, see ECF No. 56, shall remain in
effect.

By the Court,

________________________
F. Dennis Saylor IV

Dated:

9
315851947v.2

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.mad.238919.265.0.pdf
Size: 44,897 bytes
SHA-256: 427a8b3f27764060f57babaaa2729e53640e1a12598d5a66f49c4b147062fbc5
Our copy: gov.uscourts.mad.238919.265.0.pdf
Original: No public link identified.