LR 26-3 INTERIM STATUS REPORT OF PLAINTIFF INTERFACE OPERATIONS LLC AND DEFENDANT ANT KWAME LUANGISA

CARL W. HOFFMAN, Magistrate Judge.

PLAINTIFF INTERFACE OPERATIONS LLC, d/b/a AdFam (hereinafter, "Plaintiff" or "AdFam") by and through its counsel of record, and DEFENDANT KWAME LUANGISA (hereinafter, "Defendant" or "Luangisa"), by and through his counsel of record, hereby submit this Interim Status Report pursuant to LR 26-3 regarding the above-referenced matter.

I. Litigation Status

This matter commenced with the filing of Plaintiff's Complaint on February 11, 2016. Defendant filed his answer on March 15, 2016. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order entered by the Court on April 29, 2016 (ECF No. 24), close of discovery is currently scheduled for September 12, 2016, with the deadline to file dispositive motions set for October 12, 2016.

On July 13, 2016, Plaintiff inquired of Defendant whether Defendant would be amenable to a sixty (60) day extension of the current discovery deadline of September 12, 2016. The request for an extension of deadlines, if granted, would necessarily move the dates by which this matter would be prepared to go to trial.

II. Request for Continuance of Interim Status Report Concerning Particulars of LR 26-3

Local Rule 26-3 requires the parties to provide a statement estimating the time required for trial, three (3) alternative available trial dates, and whether trial will be eliminated or its length affected by substantive motions. The parties are also required to certify that they have considered consent to trial by a magistrate judge and the use of alternative dispute-resolution processes.

Plaintiff believes trial will last 3-5 days. Defendant believes trial will last 1-2 days. Plaintiff believes that the length of trial will likely be affected by substantive motions. Defendant believes trial will be eliminated or its length affected by substantive motions.

At this time, because of the outstanding request to Defendant regarding the extension of discovery deadlines (and, should Defendant deny such request, a subsequent motion to extend discovery deadlines), Plaintiff requests a continuance on the requirement of LR 26-3 to provide three (3) alternative available trial dates. Defendant does not oppose this request.

The parties hereby certify that they have considered consent to trial by a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73, use of the Short Trial Program, and the use of alternative dispute-resolution processes including mediation, arbitration, and early neutral evaluation.

III. Conclusion

Accordingly, Plaintiff requests this Court enter an order continuing the requirement of LR 26-3 to provide three (3) alternative trial dates for a period of twenty-one (21) days or within such time as (1) the parties can obtain an order on a stipulation granting an extension of the discovery deadlines, or (2) Plaintiff can obtain an order granting a motion to extend the discovery deadlines.

IT IS SO ORDERED. The requirement of LR 26-3 to provide three (3) alternative trial dates is extended for a period of twenty-one (21) days from the date of entry of this Order, or within such time as (1) the parties can obtain an order on a stipulation granting an extension of the discovery deadlines, or (2) Plaintiff can obtain an order granting a motion to extend the discovery deadlines, whichever is later.