Filed: Jul. 31, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 31, 2014
Summary: ORDER GEORGE FOLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge. The Court has received the parties' Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. LR 26-1(e)(1) provides that unless otherwise ordered, discovery periods longer than one hundred eighty (180) days from the date the first defendant answers or appears will require special scheduling review. LR 26-1(d) states that if longer deadlines are sought, the plan shall state on its face "SPECIAL SCHEDULING REVIEW REQUESTED." Where such special scheduling review
Summary: ORDER GEORGE FOLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge. The Court has received the parties' Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. LR 26-1(e)(1) provides that unless otherwise ordered, discovery periods longer than one hundred eighty (180) days from the date the first defendant answers or appears will require special scheduling review. LR 26-1(d) states that if longer deadlines are sought, the plan shall state on its face "SPECIAL SCHEDULING REVIEW REQUESTED." Where such special scheduling review ..
More
ORDER
GEORGE FOLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge.
The Court has received the parties' Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. LR 26-1(e)(1) provides that unless otherwise ordered, discovery periods longer than one hundred eighty (180) days from the date the first defendant answers or appears will require special scheduling review. LR 26-1(d) states that if longer deadlines are sought, the plan shall state on its face "SPECIAL SCHEDULING REVIEW REQUESTED." Where such special scheduling review is requested, the plan shall state the reasons why longer or different time periods should apply.
In this case, the first answer by a defendant was filed on May 27, 2014. Therefore, under LR 26-1(e) the standard 180 day period for discovery would expire on November 23, 2014. In their plan, however, the parties propose a discovery cutoff (other than experts) to run November 23, 2014 and to continue discovery until March 31, 2015. The discovery plan and scheduling order submitted by the parties, therefore, does not comply with LR 26-1(e)(1). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties' Stipulated Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order filed (#13) is denied, without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are to file a revised Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order in compliance with LR 26-1(d), including any request for special scheduling review, within seven (7) days of the date of this order.
