Pharmaceutical Care Management Association v. Tufte, 1:17-cv-141. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. North Dakota
Number: infdco20171221d57
Visitors: 17
Filed: Dec. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 20, 2017
Summary: ORDER CHARLES S. MILLER, JR. , Magistrate Judge . On December 18, 2017, the parties filed a "Joint Status Report and Proposed Schedule for Briefing of Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. They advised, amongst other things, that they do not presently anticipate a need for discovery and intend on proceeding directly with briefing on cross-motions of summary judgment. They further propose the following briefing schedule and page limitations: Brief Due Date
Summary: ORDER CHARLES S. MILLER, JR. , Magistrate Judge . On December 18, 2017, the parties filed a "Joint Status Report and Proposed Schedule for Briefing of Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. They advised, amongst other things, that they do not presently anticipate a need for discovery and intend on proceeding directly with briefing on cross-motions of summary judgment. They further propose the following briefing schedule and page limitations: Brief Due Date ..
More
ORDER
CHARLES S. MILLER, JR., Magistrate Judge.
On December 18, 2017, the parties filed a "Joint Status Report and Proposed Schedule for Briefing of Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. They advised, amongst other things, that they do not presently anticipate a need for discovery and intend on proceeding directly with briefing on cross-motions of summary judgment. They further propose the following briefing schedule and page limitations:
Brief Due Date Page Length
Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment January 19, 2018 40
Defendants' Combined Opposition and March 9, 2018 50
Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
Plaintiff's Combined Reply and Opposition April 9, 2018 50
to Defendants' Cross-Motion
Defendants' Reply April 23, 2018 20
The court ADOPTS the parties' proposed briefing schedule and ORDERS that the parties file their respective motions and briefs subject to the due dates and page lengths specified above. Should a party later change its position with respect to discovery, it should file the appropriate motion with the court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
