BURTON v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, 1:13-CV-00307 LJO JLT. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20141107686
Visitors: 8
Filed: Nov. 06, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 06, 2014
Summary: ORDER SETTING FURTHER SCHEDULING CONFERENCE JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge. Because this case has been scheduled only through class related activities—and these have now been completed—the Court ORDERS: 1. The Court sets a further scheduling conference on December 17, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. Telephonic appearances via the CourtCall service are authorized; 2. No later than December 10, 2014, counsel SHALL file a joint further scheduling conference report which SHALL include a discussi
Summary: ORDER SETTING FURTHER SCHEDULING CONFERENCE JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge. Because this case has been scheduled only through class related activities—and these have now been completed—the Court ORDERS: 1. The Court sets a further scheduling conference on December 17, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. Telephonic appearances via the CourtCall service are authorized; 2. No later than December 10, 2014, counsel SHALL file a joint further scheduling conference report which SHALL include a discussio..
More
ORDER SETTING FURTHER SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
Because this case has been scheduled only through class related activities—and these have now been completed—the Court ORDERS:
1. The Court sets a further scheduling conference on December 17, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. Telephonic appearances via the CourtCall service are authorized;
2. No later than December 10, 2014, counsel SHALL file a joint further scheduling conference report which SHALL include a discussion of the following issues:
a. Any proposed amendment to the pleadings presently on file;
b. A proposed deadline for amendments to pleadings;
c. Whether additional discovery is needed as to Plaintiff's individual claims and, if so, a proposed deadline to complete this discovery;
d. Whether either party anticipates using the services of an expert as to Plaintiff's individual claims and, if so, deadlines by which experts must be disclosed and discovery completed as to experts;
e. The deadline by which non-dispostive and dispositive motions will be filed related to Plaintiff's individual claims. Dispositive motions must be filed at least seven weeks before the pretrial conference and non-dispositive motions must be filed at least six weeks before the dispositive motions unless the parties determine that the dispositive motion would not be impacted by any ruling on the nondispositive motions;
f. An estimate of the number of trial days required;
g. The proposed trial date that should be at least 24 weeks after the close of discovery, if any;
h. The proposed pretrial conference date which should be at least eight weeks before the trial date;
i. Because the District Judges' dockets are extremely crowded, the parties should consider and address the issue of whether they are willing to consent to the jurisdiction of a U.S. Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(c).
j. Whether either party requests bifurcation or phasing of trial, or any other suggestion for shortening or expediting discovery, pre-trial motions or trial.
k. Whether this matter is related to any matter pending in this court or any other court, including any bankruptcy court.
l. Joint Scheduling Reports are to be emailed, in Word format, to JL Torders@caed.uscourts.gov.
m. Any other matters counsel wish to bring to the Court's attention.
SHOULD COUNSEL OR A PARTY APPEARING PRO SE FAIL TO APPEAR AT THE FURTHER MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, OR FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS AS SET FORTH ABOVE, AN EX PARTE HEARING MAY BE HELD AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL, DEFAULT, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED, INCLUDING SANCTIONS AND CONTEMPT OF COURT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
