City of Metropolis, Illinois et al v. Honeywell International, Inc.

Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
CITY OF METROPOLIS, ILLINOIS, a
Municipal Corporations, and
COUNTY OF MASSAC, a Municipal
Corporation,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 21-cv-860-SMY
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
YANDLE, Chief District Judge:
Dr. Phillip Plato was disclosed as Plaintiffs’ health physics and dose calculation expert in
March 2023. 	Dr. Plato died on November 8, 2025. 	Plaintiffs’ counsel informed Honeywell’s
counsel of Dr. Plato’s death shortly thereafter. Now pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion
to Substitute Dr. Timothy Mousseau and Anne White for Dr. Plato (Doc. 170), which Honeywell
opposes in part (Doc. 171).
Discussion
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not expressly delineate the process or standard a
court should utilize when faced with a motion to substitute an expert. That said, the Court views
Plaintiff’s motion as a request to reopen the deadlines imposed in the scheduling order under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4). See e.g., Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. Transamerica Fin.
Life Ins. Co., 2010 WL 3892860, at *2 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 30, 2010). Under Rule 16, the court may
modify a scheduling order if the party seeking modification shows good cause. When considering
Case 3:21-cv-00860-SMY Document 172 Filed 03/06/26 Page 1 of 3 Page ID
#<pageID>

Page 2 of 3
whether good cause exists, “the primary consideration for courts is the diligence of the party
seeking amendment.” Alioto v. Town of Lisbon, 651 F.3d 715, 720 (7th Cir. 2011).
Plaintiffs timely disclosed Dr. Plato pursuant to the operative scheduling order and have
been diligent to substitute Dr. Plato following his death. 	Plaintiffs identified White as a health
physicist and represent that she will offer a report consistent with the subjects, theories, and
opinions of Dr. Plato’s report as to the ingestion doses at issue in this litigation. The Court finds
good cause to substitute White for Dr. Plato. However, White’s expert report and testimony must
address the same subject matter as Dr. Plato’s expert report without meaningful changes. In other
words, Plaintiffs cannot escape the ingestion dose concessions or admissions of Dr. Plato. 	See
Lincoln, 2010 WL 3892860, at *2 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 30, 2010) (courts generally limit the scope of
the testimony that may be given by the substitute expert even if a substitution is allowed); Dunkin'
Donuts, Inc. v. N.A.S.T., Inc., No. 02 C 1272, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16703, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Aug.
10, 2005) (rejecting an “entirely new” substitute report with “major differences” that “re-invented
the wheel”). The Court will also permit Honeywell to file a renewed Daubert motion, if necessary.
Plaintiffs also seek to substitute Dr. Mousseau, an evolutionary biologist, who is prepared
to offer a report consistent with the subjects, theories, and opinions of Dr. Plato’s report as to the
absorbed doses at issue in this litigation. Dr. Plato was not a biologist and his lack of biological
expertise was the subject of a Daubert challenge. A substitute expert “must ‘have a similar area
of expertise’” to the original expert. Todero v. Blackwell, 2021 WL 4472550, at *7 (S.D. Ind. Sept.
30, 2021) (quoting Stringer v. Cambria Fabshop-Indianapolis, LLC, 2015 WL 13632234, at *2
(S.D. Ind. Oct. 2, 2015)). Allowing Plaintiffs to substitute a biologist for Dr. Plato at this juncture
would be highly prejudicial to Honeywell. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion will be denied as to the
substitution of Dr. Mousseau for Dr. Plato.
Case 3:21-cv-00860-SMY Document 172 Filed 03/06/26 Page 2 of 3 Page ID
#<pageID>

Page 3 of 3
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Substitute is GRANTED in part and
DENIED in part. 	Anne White is hereby substituted for Dr. Phillip Plato. 	In light of the
substitution, the Court VACATES the final pretrial conference set for June 4, 2026, and jury trial
set for June 22, 2026, and sets the following schedule:
x 	White’s written report is due by March 23, 2026;
x 	White’s deposition must be taken by May 7, 2026;
x 	Any Daubert motion as to White is due by June 22, 2026.
The final pretrial conference and jury trial dates will be reset, if necessary, upon the Court’s ruling
on the pending dispositive motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: March 6, 2026
STACI M. YANDLE
Chief United States District Judge
Case 3:21-cv-00860-SMY Document 172 Filed 03/06/26 Page 3 of 3 Page ID
#<pageID>