Filed: Jan. 16, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 16, 2015
Summary: ORDER SETTING MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge. On January 16, 2015, the Court held an informal teleconference. Counsel Megan Gyongyos appeared for Plaintiff and counsel Heather Cohen appeared for Defendants. As a result of the call, a scheduling conference is set for March 3, 2015 at 3:30 p.m. Seven days prior to the scheduling conference, the parties shall file a Joint Scheduling Report that includes the following information: 1. A proposed deadline for am
Summary: ORDER SETTING MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge. On January 16, 2015, the Court held an informal teleconference. Counsel Megan Gyongyos appeared for Plaintiff and counsel Heather Cohen appeared for Defendants. As a result of the call, a scheduling conference is set for March 3, 2015 at 3:30 p.m. Seven days prior to the scheduling conference, the parties shall file a Joint Scheduling Report that includes the following information: 1. A proposed deadline for ame..
More
ORDER SETTING MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
On January 16, 2015, the Court held an informal teleconference. Counsel Megan Gyongyos appeared for Plaintiff and counsel Heather Cohen appeared for Defendants. As a result of the call, a scheduling conference is set for March 3, 2015 at 3:30 p.m.
Seven days prior to the scheduling conference, the parties shall file a Joint Scheduling Report that includes the following information:
1. A proposed deadline for amendments to pleadings. Any proposed amendment to the pleadings presently on file shall be filed by its proponent contemporaneously with the Scheduling Conference Report.
2. A complete and detailed discovery plan addressing the following:
a. A date for the exchange of initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) or a statement that disclosures have already been exchanged;
b. A firm cut-off date for non-expert discovery;
c. A firm date for disclosure of expert witnesses as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2);
d. A firm cut-off date for expert witness discovery;
e. Any proposed changes in the limits on discovery imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b); 30(a)(2)(A), (B); 30(d); or 33(a);
f. Whether the parties anticipate the need for a protective order relating to the discovery of information relating to a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information;
g. Any issues or proposals relating to the timing, sequencing, phasing or scheduling of discovery;
h. Whether the parties anticipate the need to take discovery outside the United States and, if so, a description of the proposed discovery; and
i. Whether any party anticipates video and/or sound recording of depositions.
The discovery/expert cut-off deadlines are the dates by which all discovery must be completed. Discovery motions will not be heard after the discovery deadlines. Moreover, absent good cause, the Court will only grant relief on a discovery motion if the relief requested requires the parties to act before the expiration of the relevant discovery deadline. In other words, discovery requests and deposition notices must be served sufficiently in advance of the discovery deadlines to permit time for a response, time to meet and confer, time to prepare, file and hear a motion to compel and time to obtain relief on a motion to compel. Counsel are expected to take these contingencies into account when proposing discovery deadlines. All of these dates should be considered firm dates.
3. Dates agreed to by all counsel for:
a. Filing non-dispositive and dispositive pre-trial motions with the understanding that motions (except motions in limine or other trial motions) will not be entertained after the agreed upon date, which shall be no later than ten (10) weeks prior to the proposed Pre-Trial Conference date.
b. Pre-Trial Conference Date. (This date shall be no later than forty-five (45) days prior to the proposed trial date.)
c. Trial date and whether bench or jury trial and estimate length of time.
All of these dates should be considered firm dates. Dates should be set to allow the Court to decide any matters under submission before the Pre-Trial Conference is set.
4. The parties are encouraged to discuss settlement, and must include a statement in the Joint Scheduling Report as to the possibility of settlement. The parties shall indicate when they desire a settlement conference, e.g., before further discovery, after discovery, after pre-trial motions, etc.
For reference purposes, the Court requires that the Joint Scheduling Report indicate the date, time, and courtroom of the Scheduling Conference. This information is to be placed opposite the caption on the first page of the Report.
At the conference, the parties indicated a willingness to appear telephonically at the scheduling conference which this court allows. Therefore, if one or more parties wish to appear telephonically for the conference, counsel shall contact Mamie Hernandez, Courtroom Deputy Clerk, at (559) 499-5672, sufficiently in advance of the conference so that a notation can be placed on the court calendar. The Courtroom Clerk will then provide counsel with the toll-free teleconference number and teleconference code for the call. Additionally, counsel are directed to indicate on the face page of their Joint Scheduling Report that the conference will be telephonic.
The parties are also directed to the Court's website at www.caed.uscourts.gov under Judges; Boone (SAB); "Case Management Procedures" for specific information regarding Chambers' procedures. Information about law and motion, scheduling conferences, telephonic appearances, and discovery disputes is provided at this link.
Based upon the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The parties shall appear for a scheduling conference on March 3, 2015 at 3:30 p.m. in Courtroom 9 (SAB) before Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone; and
2. On or before February 24, 2015, the parties shall file a Joint Scheduling Report.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
