Saunsoci v. United States, 8:18CV298. (2020)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20200113b65
Visitors: 23
Filed: Jan. 10, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 10, 2020
Summary: AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court on the parties' Unopposed Motion to Extend Case Progression Deadlines. ( Filing No. 44. ) The Motion is granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the provisions of the Court's earlier final progression order remain in effect, and in addition to those provisions, the following shall apply: 1) The trial and pretrial conference will not be reset at this time. A telephonic status conference to
Summary: AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . THIS MATTER is before the Court on the parties' Unopposed Motion to Extend Case Progression Deadlines. ( Filing No. 44. ) The Motion is granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the provisions of the Court's earlier final progression order remain in effect, and in addition to those provisions, the following shall apply: 1) The trial and pretrial conference will not be reset at this time. A telephonic status conference to ..
More
AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, Magistrate Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the parties' Unopposed Motion to Extend Case Progression Deadlines. (Filing No. 44.) The Motion is granted.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the provisions of the Court's earlier final progression order remain in effect, and in addition to those provisions, the following shall apply:
1) The trial and pretrial conference will not be reset at this time. A telephonic status conference to discuss case progression, the parties' interest in settlement and the trial and pretrial conference settings will be held with the undersigned magistrate judge on March 10, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. (Filing No. 45.)
2) The deadline for completing written discovery under Rules 33, 34, and 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is April 10, 2020. Motions to compel discovery under Rules 33, 34, and 36 must be filed by April 24, 2020
Note: A motion to compel, to quash, or for a disputed protective order shall not be filed without first contacting the chambers of the undersigned magistrate judge to set a conference for discussing the parties' dispute.
3) The deadlines for identifying expert witnesses expected to testify at the trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non-retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are:
For the plaintiff(s): November 22, 2019
For the defendant(s): February 28, 2020
4) The deadlines for complete expert disclosures1 for all experts expected to testify at trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non-retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are:
For the plaintiff(s): November 22, 2019
For the defendant(s): February 28, 2020
Plaintiff(s)' rebuttal: March 20, 2020
5) The deposition deadline is April 10, 2020.
a. The maximum number of depositions that may be taken by the plaintiffs as a group and the defendants as a group is 8.
b. Depositions will be limited by Rule 30(d)(1).
6) The deadline for filing motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment is April 20, 2020.
7) The deadline for filing motions to exclude testimony on Daubert and related grounds is May 19, 2020.
8) Motions in limine shall be filed seven days before the pretrial conference. It is not the normal practice to hold hearings on motions in limine or to rule on them prior to the first day of trial. Counsel should plan accordingly.
9) The parties shall comply with all other stipulations and agreements recited in their Rule 26(f) planning report that are not inconsistent with this order.
10) All requests for changes of deadlines or settings established herein shall be directed to the undersigned magistrate judge, including all requests for changes of trial dates. Such requests will not be considered absent a showing of due diligence in the timely progression of this case and the recent development of circumstances, unanticipated prior to the filing of the motion, which require that additional time be allowed.
FootNotes
1. While treating medical and mental health care providers are generally not considered "specially retained experts," not all their opinions relate to the care and treatment of a patient. Their opinion testimony is limited to what is stated within their treatment documentation. As to each such expert, any opinions which are not stated within that expert's treatment records and reports must be separately and timely disclosed.
Source: Leagle
