Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
7 8 9 10 11 12

Robert Krumlauf, Plaintiff, v. Phoenix Police Department, et al., Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) CV- 04-0720-PHX-ROS (LOA) ) ) SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY ) ORDER ) )

13

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, having filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
14

and defendant(s) having answered,
15

IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall comply with the following deadlines and
16

discovery orders:
17

EVENT
18

DEADLINE 8/30/06

1. Motions to Amend Pleadings or join other parties)
19

2. Motions to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment based
20

solely on a defense of absolute or qualified immunity
21

arguing that the law was not clearly established at the
22

time of the events alleged in the complaint or that
23

the defense is otherwise meritorious.
24

4/13/06

3. Last day by which discovery requests
25

may be submitted (discovery shall be completed
26

4/28/06

3.1.
27 28

No discovery requests may be submitted after the completion date except by leave of the Court and upon a showing of good cause.

Case 2:04-cv-00720-ROS-LOA

Document 27

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3.2.

Responses to discovery must be filed within the time provided by the rules unless the parties stipulate otherwise.

4. If defendants desire to take plaintiff's deposition they may do so by no later than 4.1. 5/30/06 Leave of Court for the taking of such deposition is granted pursuant to Rule 30(a)(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The deposition may be taken by telephone at the option of defendant(s). 5. Discovery disputes must be brought to the attention of the Court by 5.1. 6/30/06 See paragraph 9 regarding discovery dispute procedure. 8/30/06 10/30/06

6. Dispositive motion deadline is 7. Proposed joint pretrial order lodged with the Court by 7.1.

Defendant(s) are responsible for initiating the drafting and submission of the proposed pretrial order in the form prescribed by the assigned trial judge.

8. Limits on discovery.

8.1.

Interrogatories: No more than 25 (including subparts) by each party to any other party

8.2.

Requests for production of documents: No more than 15 from each party to any other party

8.3.

Requests for admissions: No more than 10 from each party to any other party

8.4.

Depositions: Because of the logistical problems involved, self-represented incarcerated parties may not take oral depositions without prior Court permission. Such permission will not be granted except upon a showing of exceptional circumstances.

2

Case 2:04-cv-00720-ROS-LOA

Document 27

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

9. Discovery disputes. 9.1. The Court will not entertain motions to compel discovery, motions for sanctions, motions for protective orders, or the like unless and until there has been compliance with the following procedure: In the event of a dispute over discovery, the parties must confer in good faith, in person or by telephone, and attempt to resolve the dispute. Rule 37(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; Rule 7.2(j), Rules of Practice of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. DATED this 27th day of February, 2006.

3

Case 2:04-cv-00720-ROS-LOA

Document 27

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 3 of 3