LIND v. CARPENTER, CV-13-00032-TUC-JAS. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20150826915
Visitors: 24
Filed: Aug. 25, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 25, 2015
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is the parties' joint motion for a telephonic status conference. The motion is granted to the extent this Order should resolve any concerns reflected in the motion, and is denied to the extent a telephonic status conference is unnecessary in light of this Order. The parties have concerns with various deadlines in the Scheduling Order expiring prior to the resolution of discovery disputes, and the impact on other requirements in
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is the parties' joint motion for a telephonic status conference. The motion is granted to the extent this Order should resolve any concerns reflected in the motion, and is denied to the extent a telephonic status conference is unnecessary in light of this Order. The parties have concerns with various deadlines in the Scheduling Order expiring prior to the resolution of discovery disputes, and the impact on other requirements in ..
More
ORDER
JAMES A. SOTO, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is the parties' joint motion for a telephonic status conference. The motion is granted to the extent this Order should resolve any concerns reflected in the motion, and is denied to the extent a telephonic status conference is unnecessary in light of this Order. The parties have concerns with various deadlines in the Scheduling Order expiring prior to the resolution of discovery disputes, and the impact on other requirements in the Scheduling Order. As such, all deadlines in the Scheduling Order are stayed until after the current discovery disputes (as well as the motion the Government expects to file in the near future) are ruled upon by the Court. Within 14 days after the Court rules on the discovery disputes, the parties shall submit a stipulation (or motion if the parties can not reach an agreement) and proposed Order which will almost certainly be granted. The Court is flexible and the deadlines in the Scheduling Order are fluid; the parties should feel free to consult with each other and submit stipulations and proposed Orders adjusting the deadlines and adding any necessary clarification that is best for them.
Source: Leagle
