Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DAPRIZIO v. HARRAH'S LAS VEGAS, INC., 2:10-cv-604-RCJ-RJJ. (2012)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20120215916 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 14, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 14, 2012
Summary: ORDER ROBERT J. JOHNSTON, Magistrate Judge. This matter was submitted to the undersigned Magistrate Judge on Plaintiff's Application Ex Parte to Set a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference (#48). The Court has reviewed the Ex Parte Application (#48) and finds no reason for this motion, nor for the ex parte nature of the motion. Plaintiff's counsel is admonished to proceed in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of the Court. This thirty (30) page submission to
More

ORDER

ROBERT J. JOHNSTON, Magistrate Judge.

This matter was submitted to the undersigned Magistrate Judge on Plaintiff's Application Ex Parte to Set a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference (#48).

The Court has reviewed the Ex Parte Application (#48) and finds no reason for this motion, nor for the ex parte nature of the motion. Plaintiff's counsel is admonished to proceed in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of the Court. This thirty (30) page submission to the Court does nothing to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this action. Good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Application Ex Parte to Set a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference (#48) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before March 7, 2012, the parties shall file a proposed joint discovery plan and scheduling order.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer