Basu v. Mass. Mut. Life Ins. Co.

MATTHEW L. SHARP, LTD.

Matthew L. Sharp, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 4766

Attorneys for Plaintiff Sanghamitra Basu

WRIGHT, FINLAY & ZAK, LLP

Robert A. Riether, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12076

Attorneys for Defendant Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company

CLAGGETT & SYKES LAW FIRM

Sean K. Claggett, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 8407

Samuel A. Harding, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 1877

Shannon L. Wise Nevada Bar No. 14509

Attorneys for Plaintiff Sanghamitra Basu

FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP

Kimberly A. Jones, Esq. Admitted pro hac vice

Eric F. Au, Esq. Admitted pro hac vice One Logan Square

Attorneys for Defendant Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company

JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER

The parties to this consolidated action, through counsel and in accordance with LR II 163, submit this Joint Pretrial Order.

After pretrial proceedings in this case,

IT IS ORDERED:

I.

This is an action for: Dr. Sangha Basu is insured under an individual disability income insurance policy issued by MassMutual. Dr. Sangha Basu alleges that MassMutual breached the policy when it determined that her claim for total disability benefits was subject to the policy's mental disorder limitation. MassMutual contends that it did not breach the policy and that Dr. Basu is not totally disabled due to physical conditions.

II.

Statement of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C § 1332(a). Plaintiff is resident of Nevada. Defendant is a resident of Massachusetts. The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

III.

The following facts are admitted by the parties and require no proof:

1. Dr. Basu is insured under MassMutual disability income insurance policy no. 8455557 (the “Policy”).

2. The Policy includes the relevant terms governing Dr. Basu's claim.

3. Dr. Basu's occupation was a pain management specialist.

4. In December 2015, Dr. Basu stopped working as a pain management physician.

IV.

The following facts, though not admitted, will not be contested at trial by evidence to the contrary.

Not applicable

V.

The following issues of fact to be tried and determined at trial.

The parties agree that the following issues of fact are to be tried and determined at trial:

1. Did MassMutual breach the Policy when it stopped paying Dr. Basu's claim on November 16, 2021 based upon the mental disorder limitation?

2. If MassMutual breached the disability insurance policy, what are Dr. Basu's damages to Dr. Basu?

Defendant maintains, and Plaintiff disagrees, that the following issues of fact are also to be tried and determined at trial:

1. Why did Dr. Basu stop working as a pain management physician in December 2015?

2. Is Dr. Basu unable to perform the main duties of her occupation as a pain management physician due to physical medical conditions and absent the effects of any mental disorders?

3. Did Dr. Basu meet the Policy's requirement that she provide MassMutual with proof of total disability due to physical conditions?

VI.

The following are the issues of law to be tried and determined at trial:

Plaintiffs view: There are no issues of law to be tried and determined at trial.

Defendant's view: 1.) Breach; 2.) Causation; 3.) Damages; and 4.) Any issues of law raised in the parties' anticipated motions in limine.

VII.

(a) The following exhibits are stipulated into evidence in this case and may be so marked by the court;

1. MassMutual Disability Income Insurance Policy No. 8455557

2. Letter from MassMutual to Plaintiff dated December 4, 2019

(b) As to the following exhibits, the party against whom the same will be offered objects to their admission on the grounds stated:

1. Plaintiff intends to present the following exhibits, and Defendant intends to assert the following objections:

No.	Name	Cite	Objections
3	Disability Claim Mental Disorder Limitation	ECF 60-2 at Ex. 2	Irrelevant; Confuses the Issues: Misleads the Jury; and Contravenes Com! Order
4	Dr. Snyder Presentation	BASU-Dr Snyder-000012-40	Lack of Authentication; Irrelevant; Confuses the Issues; Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
5	MassMutual Claim File	MM/Basu 1-4369	Vague and Ambiguous/Overbroad; Inadmissible Hearsay; Irrelevant

No.	Name	Cite	Objections
6	Attending Physician Statements	ECF 60-6 at Exs. 14-15	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; Best Evidence Rule; Lack of Foundation; and Inadmissible Expert Opinion
7	Notes of Pre-Disability Earnings	ECF 60-6 at Ex. 18	Irrelevant; Confuses the Issues; and Misleads the Jury
8	May 8, 2018 Email	MM/Basu 5590	Irrelevant; Misleads the Jury; and Confuses the Issues
9	October 6, 2016 Email	MM/Basu 4580-84	Best Evidence Rule; Misleads the Jury; and Confuses the Issues
10	October 21. 2016 Detail Call	ECF No. 60-7 at Ex. 21	Inadmissible Hearsay
12	May 11, 2017 Email	MM/Basu 5047-5130	Inadmissible Hearsay; Confuses the Issues; Misleads the Jury; Inadmissible Expert Opinion; and Best Evidence Rule
14	May 8, 2018 Email	MM/Basu 5590	Irrelevant; Misleads the Jury; and Confuses the Issues
15	July 5, 2018 Email	MM/Basu 5569	Irrelevant
16	July 5, 2018 Action Plan	MM/Basu 2238-45	Confuses the Issues; and Misleads the Jury
17	October 2, 2018 Detail Call Notes	ECF 60-7 at Ex. 28	Best Evidence Rule; and Inadmissible Hearsay
18	October 3, 2018 Email	MM/Basu 5751	Irrelevant
20	MassMuttial Surveillance Reports	MM/Basu 3247-53, 3441-49, 3454-75, 2847-51	Misleads the Jury; Confuses the Issues; Calls for Speculation; and Irr elevant
23	CoventBridge Summary of Surveillance	MM/Basu 2847-51, 3805-75	Misleads the Jury; Confuses the Issues; Calls for Speculation; and Irrelevant
24	November 15, 2019 Action Plan	MM/Basu 6508	Irrelevant; Confuses the Issues; and Misleads the Jury
29	Medical Records of Dr. Cestkowski	Basu- Dr. Cestkowski 1-187	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Evidence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
30	Medical Records of Dr. Stuart Kaplan	ECF 60-2 at Ex. 5	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Evidence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule

No.	Name	Cite	Objections
31	Medical Records of Dr. Thompson	ECF 60-2 at Ex. 8	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
32	Medical Records of Hennepin Medical Clinic	ECF 60-3 at Ex. 9	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
33	Medical Records of Hennepin Medical Clinic	ECF 60-3 and 4 at Ex. 9	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
34	Medical Records of Dr. Abraham Nagy	Basu- Dr. Nagy 0001219	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; Best Evidence Rule; and Undue Prejudice/Untimely Disclosure Under FRCP 26
35	Medical Records of Dr. Mortillaro	ECF 60-6 at Ex. 12	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
36	Medical Records of Pain Institute of Nevada	Basu-PIN 1716	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; Best Evidence Rule; and Undue Prejudice/Untimely Disclosure Under FRCP 26
37	Medical Records of Dr. Germin	ECF 60-2 at Ex. 6	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
38	Medical Records of Centennial Medical Imaging	ECF 60-5 at Ex. 11	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
40	Snyder Records	Snyder-Simonmed MRI Basu 1-11	Inadmissible Hearsay; Misstates the Ev-idence/Lack of Foundation; Misleads the Jury; and Best Evidence Rule
41	Divorce Decree	ECF 60-8 at Ex. 32	Irrelevant; Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; Best Evidence Rule; and Confuses the Issues
42	Lee Email June 24, 2016	Ex 6 to Souresh Basu Dep	Irrelevant; Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; Best Evidence Rule; and Confuses the Issues
43	Addendum to Certificate of Authority	Ex. 10 to Souresh Basu Dep	Irrelevant; Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; Best Evidence Rule; and Confuses the Issues
44	Basu, Souresh Emails	Basu-Souresh Emails 1-37	Irrelevant; Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; Best Evidence Rule; and Confuses the Issues

Plaintiff s Position:

By identifying the foregoing documents, Plaintiff does not waive any right under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence to object to Plaintiffs introduction of all or a portion of the foregoing documents, depending on the context in which the evidence is offered. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed a waiver or admission of any kind.

Defendant's Position:

Plaintiff s list of exhibits identifies several exhibits of more than hundreds of pages (see, e.g., Ex. No. 36 (Basu-PIN 1-716). Accordingly, the foregoing objections are not an admission or a statement that the entirety of each of Plaintiff s exhibits is inadmissible evidence. By making the foregoing objections. Defendant does not waive any evidentiary right to introduce admissible evidence at trial, including for pruposes of impeachment.

Defendant reserves the right to make additional objections based upon the context in which evidence is offered and the nature of the evidence. Defendant further reserves the right to supplement and/or amend these objections.

2. Defendant intends to present the following exhibits, and Plaintiff intends to assert the following objections:

EXHIBITS	DESCRIPTION	BATES NO./DOCKET ENTRY (“D.E.”) NO.	Objections
	Plaintiffs Statement for Disability Benefits	D.E. 54-3	FRE 402,403,801,802
	Detail Call Notes	D.E. 54-5; 54-13; 5418; D.E. 54-24; D.E. 54-34	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802, authenticity and foundation.
	Medical Records of Dr. Richard Cestkowski's Treatment of Plaintiff	D.E. 54-7; BASU-Dr Cestkowski-000001 -187	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802
	Aliante Chiropractic Intake Form	D.E. 54-8	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802
	Medical Reports of Dr. Reva Klein	D.E. 54-9; D.E. 54-16; D.E. 54-20; D.E. 54-	FRE 402, 403,801, 802, FRCP 26(a)(2),

EXHIBITS	DESCRIPTION	BATES NO./DOCKET ENTRY (“D.E.”) NO.	Objections
		31; D.E. 54-35: D.E. 54-44; D.E. 54-51	authenticity and foundation.
	Desert Oasis Clinic Form	D.E. 54-10	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802
	Letters from MassMuttial to Plaintiff	D.E. 54-11; D.E. 5414; D.E. 54-27; D.E. 54-28; D.E. 54-29; D.E. 54-33; D.E. 5438; D.E. 54-55	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802
	Medical Reports of Dr. Frederick Kadushin	D.E. 54-12; D.E. 5421; D.E. 54-23; D.E. 54-32; D.E. 54-36	FRE 402, 403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation.
	Letters of Calls Between Dr. Klein and Dr. Nagy	D.E. 54-15; D.E. 54-43	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation.
	MassMuttial Action Plans	D.E. 54-17; D.E. 5425; D.E. 54-39; D.E. 54-42; D.E. 54-49	FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation.
	Dr. Mortillaro's Neuropsychological Evaluation Report	D.E. 54-19	FRE 402, 403, FRCP 26(a)(2)
	Letter of Call Between Dr. Kadushin and Dr. Mortillaio	D.E. 54-22	FRE 402, 403,
	Email from Plaintiff to MassMuttial	D.E. 54-26	FRE 402,403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2), foundation
	Dr. Tupper's Neuropsychological Evaluation Report	D.E. 54-30	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation
	Medical Reports of Dr. Arm Markes	D.E. 54-37; D.E. 5446; D.E. 54-52	FRE 402, 403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation
	MassMuttial File Consultation Memos	D.E. 54-40; D.E. 5448; D.E. 54-53	FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation

EXHIBITS	DESCRIPTION	BATES NO./DOCKET ENTRY (“D.E.”) NO.	Objections
	Medical Reports of Dr. Lori Folk-Barron	D.E. 54-41; D.E. 54-50	FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation
	Letter of Call Between Dr. Markes and Dr. Katherine Travnicek	D.E. 54-45	FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation
	Medical Report of Dr. Mark Jackowitz	D.E. 54-47	FRE 402,403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2), authenticity and foimdation
	Medical Records of Plaintiff from Sunrise Hospital	MM/Basu - 002918-19	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2), authenticity and foundation
	Plaintiffs' Responses to MassMutual's Interrogatories		FRE 402, 403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2)
	Plaintiffs' Responses to MassMutual's Requests for Admission		FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2)
	MassMutual's Chief Claim Consultant File Review	D.E. 54-54	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2) authenticity and foundation
	Siu-veillance Videos of Plaintiff	D.E. 54-59; D.E. 54-60	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2) authenticity and foundation
	Report of MassMutual's Medical Expert, Dr. Akhil Chhatre	D.E. 54-62	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; authenticity and foundation
	Photographs of Plaintiff Ziplining	D.E. 54-66	FRE 402, 403,801, 802;lack of authenticity and foundation and FRCP 26 disclosure
	MassMutual's Pay History for Plaintiff s Claim	D.E. 54-67	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; authenticity and foundation

EXHIBITS	DESCRIPTION	BATES NO./DOCKET ENTRY (“D.E.”) NO.	Objections
	Reports of Dr. Stephen L. G. Rothman	BASU-Dr Fish-002728-30; BASU-Dr Fish-002527-30; BASU-Dr Fish-002765-67; BASU-Dr Fish-000117-18; BASU-Dr Fish-00 11920	FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation
	Reports of Dr. Barry A. Hendin	BASU-Dr Fish-002507-10; BASU-Dr Fish-004128; BASU-Dr Fish-004151; BASU-Dr Gross-001854; BASU-Dr Fish-002468	FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation
	Transcript of Deposition of Dr. Leo Germin	BASU-Dr Fish-001980-99	FRE 402,403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(1), FRCP 26(a)(2); FRCP 32(a)
	Transcript of Deposition of Dr. Jeffrey Gross	BASU-Dr Fish-001802-49	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(1), FRCP 26(a)(2); FRCP 32(a)
	Reports of Dr. Zoran Maric	BASU-Dr Gross-001732-1741; BASU-Dr Fish-004201-03; BASU-Dr Fish-004272-73; BASU-Dr Gross-002093-95; BASU-Dr Gross-003720-21	FRE 402, 403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2; authenticity and foundation
	Transcript of Deposition of Dr. David Fish	BASU-Dr Fish-001670-94	FRE 402,403,801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(1), FRCP 26(a)(2); FRCP 32(a); authenticity and foundation
	Reports of Dr. Howard Tung	BASU-Dr Fish-004056-4105; BASU-Dr Fish-005614-5660	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation
	Medical Records of Dr. Stuart Kaplan's Treatment of Plaintiff	D.E. 60-2 at Ex. 5	FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; authenticity and foundation

EXHIBITS	DESCRIPTION	BATES NO./DOCKET ENTRY (“D.E.”) NO.	Objections
	Medical Records of Hennepin Medical Clinic's Treatment of Plaintiff	D.E. 60-3 at Ex. 9	FRE 402,403,801, 802;
	Plaintiff s Handwritten Notes	Ex. 1 to Souresh Basu's Deposition	FRE 402,403,801, 802; authenticity and foundation
	Video of Plaintiffs Slip and Fall on August 26, 2012	Ex. 1 to Dr. David Tupper's Deposition	FRE 402, 403, authenticity, foundation.
	MassMutual's Calculation of the Present Value of Future Policy Benefits	MM/Basu - 007895	FRE 402, 403, 801 authenticity, foundation and FRCP 26(a)(1).
	Exhibits to Depositions and Deposition Transcripts of Plaintiff, Sabitri Mangai, Dr. Abraham Nagy, Dr. David Tupper, and Souresh Basu		This categoiy of identification is not reasonable and not a good faith compliance with LR-16-3 or 16-4. Plaintiff objects to the exhibits on the basis FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(1), FRCP 26(a)(2); FRCP 32(a); authenticity and foundation.
	Medical Records that MassMutual obtained to evaluate Plaintiffs Claim		This general categoiy of identification is not reasonable under LR-16-3 or 16-4. This general categoiy of identification is not reasonable and is not identifiable by Bates-stamp nos. Plaintiff objects to the exhibits on the basis FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(1), FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation.

	Documents Produced by Non-Parties to this Litigation in Response to Subpoenas		This general category of identification is not reasonable under LR-16-3 or 16-4. This general category of identification is not reasonable to specifically identify objections. Plaintiff objects to the exhibits on the basis FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(1), FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation.
	All pleadings filed in this litigation.		This general category of identification is not reasonable under LR-16-3 or 16-4. This general category of identification is not reasonable and is not identifiable by Bates-stamp nos. Plaintiff objects to the exhibits on the basis FRE 402, 403, 801, 802; FRCP 26(a)(1), FRCP 26(a)(2); authenticity and foundation.

Defendant's Position:

Defendant reserves the right to utilize and/or introduce at trial any documents identified or produced by any party to this litigation, including but not limited to purposes of impeachment and/or rebuttal.

By identifying the foregoing documents, Defendant does not waive any right under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence to object to Plaintiff's introduction of all or a portion of the foregoing documents, depending on the context in which the evidence is offered. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed a waiver or admission of any kind.

Plaintiff's Position:

Defendant's reservation of rights to rely upon any documents identified or produced by any party to this litigation for any purpose is inconsistent with LR 16-3(c).

(c) Electronic evidence:

Plaintiff intends to use presentation software to present evidence to the jury. They do not separately intend to introduce evidence in its electronic form. The Plaintiff will contact the court clerk or administrator to assure the presentation will be done consistent with electronic capability. Plaintiff objects to the introduction of the PDF or JPEG format of any exhibit identified by either party and objection to admission of any video deposition or any portion including Dr. Basu or Souresh Basu on the basis of hearsay and FRCP 32.

MassMutual intends to present electronic evidence to the Court, including PDFs, JPEGs, videos (e.g., Docket Entry Nos. 54-59 and 54-60 and excerpts from the videotaped depositions of Dr. Basu and Souresh Basu), etc. to jurors for the purposes of jury deliberations. MassMutual will provide such electronic evidence in a format compatible with the Court's electronic jury evidence display system, and MassMutual will contact the courtroom administrator for instructions about how to prepare evidence in an electronic format and other requirements for the Court's electronic jury display system.

(d) Depositions:

The parties agree that David Tupper, Ph.D. is the only witness who was deposed in this lawsuit whose entire testimony at trial is anticipated to be provided through deposition testimony. The Plaintiff stipulates that Dr. Basu and Dr. Nagy will testify at trial during Plaintiff's case in chief. Defendant stipulates that Sabitri Mangal will be made available to testify at trial during Plaintiff's case in chief. In the event a witness who has been deposed in this matter is unavailable or unable to provide live testimony pursuant to FRCP 32 at the time of trial, the parties stipulate that the witness' deposition testimony may be offered by the parties at the time of trial in lieu of live testimony. The parties will work in good faith to designate the portions of the deposition testimony that each party will offer and the objections that the opposing party has to the introduction of such testimony. The parties stipulate that each party has the right to utilize deposition testimony in the examination of witnesses as permitted by the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the opposing party may object to such deposition testimony at the trial. The parties agree they will not object to a party utilizing the deposition testimony in the examination of a witness on the basis that deposition testimony was not disclosed in this Joint Pretrial Order under Section VII(d).

(1) Plaintiff may offer the following deposition:

a. David Tupper:

Plaintiff will object to Dr. Tupper's testimony in its entirety on the basis of relevancy and undisclosed expert testimony pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(2). In the event the objection is overruled, Plaintiff will offer the following deposition testimony in her case in chief or cross-designations listed in Section VII(d)(1):

48:25-50:7

66:11-80:3

(2) Defendant may offer the following deposition testimony:

Dr. David Tupper	15:4-17
	16:11-20:3
	20:20-21:6
	23:17-24:8
	25:17-26:3
	28:1-16
	30:21-31:10
	37:6-15
	37:19-38:2
	38:24-39:20
	42:13-18
	45:5-46:7
	46:12-47:11
	49:4-20
	50:14-51:23
	52:3-53:7
	53:13-54: 5

	54:17-55:5
	57:6-59:5
	60:9-61:10
	64:20-66:3
	71:4-17
	72:18-23

Defendant's Position:

Defendant reserves the right to supplement and/or amend the list of testimony that it may introduce at trial. Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of any rights or objections.

Plaintiff's Position:

Defendant's rights to supplement or amend testimony is governed by LR 16-3.

(e) Objections to depositions:

(1) Without waiver of Defendant's right to object to the introduction of deposition testimony at or prior to trial, and as permitted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence, Defendant objects to the deposition testimony that Plaintiff has identified as follows:

Dr. David Tupper

Testimony	Objections
48:25-50:7	Calls for Speculation; Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; Undue Prejudice; Best Evidence Rule; and Lacks Foundation
66:11-80:3	Calls for Speculation; Inadmissible Hearsay; Misleads the Jury; Undue Prejudice; Best Evidence Rule; and Lacks Foundation

By making the foregoing objections, Defendant does not waive any evidentiary right under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and/or the Federal Rules of Evidence to introduce any admissible testimony at trial.

Defendant reserves the right to supplement and/or amend these objections prior to or at trial.

Plaintiff's Position:

Defendant's reservation of rights and assertion that it does waive any right is inconsistent with LR 16-3.

(2) Plaintiff objects to defendant's depositions as follows:

a. Dr. David Tupper:

Plaintiff will object to Dr. Tupper's testimony in its entirety on the basis of relevancy and undisclosed expert testimony pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(2). In the event the objection is overruled, Plaintiff will offer the cross-designations listed in Section VII(d)(1), and Plaintiff will offer the following objections to the testimony cited by Defendant:

• 16:11-20:3 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2)

• 20:20-21:6 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2)

• 23:17-24:8 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2); lack of com pleteness FRCP 32(a)(6).

• 25:17-26:3 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2); lack of com pleteness FRCP 32(a)(6).

• 28:1-16 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2); lack of completeness FRCP 32(a)(6)

• 30:21-31:10 - FRE 402, 403, 702, 801, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2)

• 37:6-15 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2)

• 37:19-38:2 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2);

• 38:24-39:20 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2)

• 42:13-18 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2)

• 45:5-46:7 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2); lack of completeness FRCP 32(a)(6)

• 46:12-47:11 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2).

• 54:17-55:5 - Lack of completeness FRCP 32(a)(6)

• 57:6-59:5 - FRE 402, 403, 702, lack of foundation and FRCP 26(a)(2)

VIII.

The following witnesses may be called by the parties at trial:

(a) Plaintiffs' Witnesses

1. Sanghamitra Basu c/o Matthew L. Sharp, Ltd.

432 Ridge Street

Reno, Nevada 89501

2. Stuart Kaplan, M.D.

Western Regional Center for Brain & Spine Surgery

3061 S. Maryland Pkwy.

Las Vegas, Nevada 89109

3. Katherine Travnicek, M.D.

Pain Institute of Nevada

W. Azure Drive, Ste 190 Las Vegas, NV 89130

4. Walter M. Kidwell, M.D.

Pain Institute of Nevada

W. Azure Drive, Ste 190

Las Vegas, Nevada 89106

5. Steven D. Lockman, M.D.

Minnesota Neurorehabilitation Institute

12805 Hwy 55, Suite 304 Plymouth, MN 55441

6. Elhain Taherian, M.D.

Dignity Health Medical Group

10001 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. 203

Henderson, NV 89052

7. Travis Snyder, D.O. SimonMed Imaging

7455 W. Washington Ave., Ste.

120 Las Vegas, NV 89128 (702) 433-6455

8. Terry Van Noy

2312 Prometheus Court Henderson, NV 89074

9. Terrence Clauretie, Ph.D.

217 Palmetto Point Dr. Henderson NV 89012

10. Sabitri Mangal

Faegre, Drinker, Biddle & Reath

191 North Wacker Dr., Ste 3700 Chicago, IL 60606

11. Anamika Das

4124er Saxon Drive

North Las Vegas, Nevada 89085

12. Sam Scire

9013 Raven Avenue

Las Vegas, Nevada 89143

13. Nicole Ducker

1231 Chambers Road

St. Louis, MO 63137

14. Michael B. Lee

1820 E. Sahara Ave, #110

Las Vegas, NV 89104

(b) Defendants' Witnesses:

1. Sanghamitra Basu c/o Matthew L. Sharp

Law Offices of Matthew L. Sharp

432 Ridge Street

Reno, NV 89501

2. Souresh Basu

7405 Midnight Rambler Street

Las Vegas, NV 89149

3. Abraham Nagy, M.D.

Nevada Headache Wellness

8285 West Arby Avenue, Suite 320

Las Vegas, NV 89113

4. Katherine Travnicek, M.D.

Pain Institute of Nevada

7435 West Azure Drive, Suite 190

Las Vegas, NV 89130

5. Walter Kidwell, M.D.

Pain Institute of Nevada

7435 West Azure Drive, Suite 190

Las Vegas, NV 89130

6. John Thompson, D.O.

Desert Oasis Clinic

6316 South Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 100

Las Vegas, NV 89118

7. David Tupper, M.D.

Hennepin County Medical Center

Minneapolis, MN 55415

8. Jason Jaeger, D.C.

6592 North Decatur Boulevard, Suite 115

Las Vegas, NV 89131

9. Reva B. Klein, M.D.

c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60 606

10. Frederick Kadushin, Ph.D.

1380 Main Street, Suite 205

Springfield, MA 01103

11. Lori Folk-Barron, Psy.D.

c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

12. Ann Markes, M.D.

c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

13. Mark Jackowitz, M.D.

c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

14. Sabitri Mangal c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

15. Jeff Stasiowski c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

16. Karen Schuster c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

17. Jasmine Caruk c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

18. Akhil Chhatre, M.D.

c/o Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

320 S. Canal Street, Suite 3300

Chicago, IL 60606

19. Kristin Wiggs, M.D.

Hennepin County Medical Center

825 S. 8th Street, Suite 600

Minneapolis, MN 55404

20. Charles Bernick, M.D.

Cleveland Clinic - Lou Revo Center for Brain Health

888 West Bonneville Avenue

Las Vegas, NV 89 106

21. Jeffrey Gross, M.D.

Comprehensive Injury Institute

2779 W. Horizon Ridge Parkway, #200

Henderson, NV 89502

22. Erin Bigler, Ph.D.

University of Utah School of Medicine

729 Arapeen Way

Salt Lake City, UT 84108

23. Leo Germin, M.D.

7751 Flamingo Road, Suite A-100

Las Vegas, NV 89147

24. Richard Cestkowski, D.O.

6655 W. Sahara Avenue, Suite D100

Las Vegas, NV 89146

25. Zoran Maric, M.D.

333 W. Thomas Road, Suite 202

Phoenix, AZ 85013

26. Samir Bangalore, M.D.

Nevada Neurosciences Institute

3201 S. Maryland Parkway, Suite 220

Las Vegas, NV 89109

27. Tanvir Hossein, M.D.

Sunrise Hospital & Medical Center

3196 S. Maryland Parkway, Suite 202

Las Vegas, NV 89109

28. Howard Tung, M.D.

University of California San Diego

9350 Campus Point Drive

La Jolla, CA 92037

29. Joseph Schifini, M.D.

Control Pain

600 S. Tonopah Drive, #240

Las Vegas, NV 89106

30. Barry Hendin, M.D.

Banner Health

4444 N. 32nd Street

Phoenix, AZ 85018

31. Stephen Rothman, M.D.

9233 W. Pico Boulevard

Los Angeles, CA 90035

32. Kimberley C. Meyers

10550 West Alexander Road

Las Vegas, NV 89 129

33. David E. Fish, M.D.

UCLA Health

1131 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 100

Santa Monica, CA 90401

IX.

The attorneys or parties have met and jointly offer these three trial start dates: October 30, 2023; January 15, 2024; and February 26, 2024.

It is expressly understood by the undersigned that the court will set the trial of this matter on one of the agreed-upon dates if possible; if not, the trial will be set at the convenience of the court's calendar.

X.

It is estimated that the trial will take a total of 7-10 days.

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:

XI.

ACTION BY THE COURT:

This case is set for court trial on the stacked calendar January 22, 2024 at 9:00 a.m. Calendar call will be January 17, 2024, at 1:30 p.m.

This pretrial order has been approved by the parties to this action as evidenced by their signatures or the signatures of their attorneys hereon, and the order is hereby entered and will govern the trial of this case. This order may not be amended except by court order and based upon the parties' agreement or to prevent manifest injustice.