United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Eastern Division
MICHAEL T. PARKER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to
Strike Defendant's Expert Designations . Having
considered the Motion , the Court finds that it should be
September 13, 2016, the Court entered an Order 
consolidating the instant action and Civil Action No.
2:16-cv-18-KS-MTP. In these cases, Plaintiff asserts breach
of contract, bad faith, and other claims against Defendant
arising from Defendant's denial of Plaintiff's claim
for insurance proceeds relating to property damage allegedly
caused by Hurricane Isaac on August 29, 2012, and damage to
the same property allegedly caused by a tornado on February
September 20, 2013, the Court entered an Amended Case
Management Order , which set Plaintiff's expert
designation deadline as October 3, 3016, and Defendant's
expert designation deadline as November 3, 2016. On November
1, 2016, Defendant filed a Motion , requesting that the
Court extend its expert designation deadline until after its
experts had an opportunity to inspect the subject property.
The Court found that the requested extension of an
unspecified time after Defendant's experts could inspect
the property was not justified. See Order . The
Court, however, granted Defendant a modest extension of its
expert designation deadline-until November 10, 2016.
November 10, 2016, Defendant designated three experts: H.
Kenneth Lefoldt, Jr., W. Mark Watson, and Henry Ted Dearman.
See Notice ; Exhibit [31-2]. On November 21,
2016, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Strike
Defendant's Expert Designations . Plaintiff argues
that “any incomplete expert reports and opinions
submitted on or before November 10, 2016 should be stricken
as non-compliant with the Fed. R. Civ. Proc. and Federal
Rules of Evidence 702, as the incomplete reports will not aid
the trier of fact.” See Motion  at 9.
to the Local Rules, “[a] party must make full and
complete disclosure as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2) and
L.U. Civ. R. 26(a)(2)(D) no later than the time specified in
the case management order . . . . Absent a finding of just
cause, failure to make full expert disclosures by the expert
designation deadline is grounds for prohibiting introduction
of that evidence at trial.” L.U. Civ. R. 26(a)(2). The
expert report must contain:
(i) a complete statement of all opinions the witness will
express and the basis and reasons for them;
(ii) the facts or data considered by the witness in forming
(iii) any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support
(iv) the witness's qualifications, including a list of
all publications authored in the previous 10 years;
(v) a list of all other cases in which, during the previous 4
years, the witness testified as an expert at trial or by
(vi) a statement of the compensation to be paid for the study
and testimony in the case.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B).
however, does not point to any deficiency in Defendant's
expert designations or make any specific argument that
Defendant failed to comply with Local Rule 26(a)(2) or
Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2). Instead, Plaintiff takes issue with