ORDER

PHILIP R. LAMMENS, District Judge.

On July 28, 2014, the Court ordered pro se Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to Local Rule 3.10 for lack of prosecution due to the non-filing of a Case Management Report within the time prescribed by Local Rule 3.05. Plaintiff responded (Doc. 27), and requests that the parties each be permitted to submit their own separate Case Management Report. Plaintiff states that he "does expect opposing counsel to attempt to complicate, convolute, contradict and confuse this case into a conundrum," and believes that his case is rather simple. Plaintiff also argues that he anticipates difficulties meeting with counsel for Defendants, due to his disabilities and counsel's location in Tampa, Florida.

Case management conferences are an essential part of this Court's approach to the adversary process. Local Rule 3.05 requires an in person meeting, not just to set deadlines, but also for the attorneys, including parties proceeding pro se, to meet each other and to set the groundwork for a working civil and cordial relationship. Separate case management reports would not only undermine the purpose of the rule, but would also undermine the Court's ability to enter a Case Management and Scheduling Order adopting the parties' discovery plan.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff's Motion to File Case Management Reports separately (Doc. 27) is DENIED. The parties are directed meet as required by Local Rule 3.05, and on or before September 15, 2014, the parties shall file their joint Case Management Report. Failure to comply with this Order may result in this case being dismissed for lack of prosecution.

DONE AND ORDERED.