Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Linda Vega, 13 Defendant. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Case 2:04-cv-00558-EHC Document 24 Filed 11/15/2005 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Karin Jean Smith, Plaintiff, vs.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV 04-00558-PHX-EHC-CRP SCHEDULING ORDER

Pursuant to Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a Scheduling Conference was held before this Court on Monday, November 14, 2005. Pursuant to the representations made by the parties at the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference, all parties shall comply with the deadlines established by this Order.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: A. Pursuant to the LRCiv 16.2(b) governing differentiated case management, this action is designated a standard track case. Counsel cannot, without Court approval, extend the deadlines imposed by the Court. B. Initial Disclosures shall be made by MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2006. ......

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

C. The parties shall disclose lay witnesses by MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2006. See FED.R.CIV.P. 26(a)(3). D. All discovery including answers to interrogatories and supplements to interrogatories, shall be completed by FRIDAY, APRIL 14, 2006. E. Parties are directed to LRCiv 7.2(j), which prohibits filing discovery motions unless the parties have first met to resolve any discovery difficulties. Before filing a written discovery motion, counsel shall jointly contact the Court's Law Clerk, Heather Roberts (520205-4651), to advise her of the nature of the discovery dispute. The Court will thereafter advise the parties of the procedure to resolve the dispute. F. All dispositive motions shall be filed no later than MONDAY, MAY 15, 2006. G. All parties are specifically notified that pursuant to LRCiv 7.2(i), "[i]f a motion does not conform in all substantial respects with the requirements of this Local Rule, or if the opposing party does not serve and file the required answering memoranda, or if counsel for any party fails to appear at the time and place assigned for oral argument, such noncompliance may be deemed a consent to the denial or granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily." Rules of Practice of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. H. A joint proposed pretrial order shall be lodged by FRIDAY, JUNE 16, 2006. If dispositive motions are filed, the pretrial order shall be due 30 days following resolution of the motions. The parties should contact the Court for instructions concerning the proper form of the pretrial order. I. Each party or a representative responsible for trial of the lawsuit shall appear and participate in a Pretrial Conference to be scheduled after submission of the joint proposed pretrial order. Following the Pretrial Conference, the Court will issue the final pretrial order, incorporating the joint proposed pretrial order, and any additional instructions for trial preparation. The trial date will be set at the Pretrial Conference. ......

-2Case 2:04-cv-00558-EHC Document 24 Filed 11/15/2005 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

J. This Court views compliance with the provisions of this Order as critical to its case management responsibilities and the responsibilities of the parties under Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. DATED this 14th day of November, 2005.

-3Case 2:04-cv-00558-EHC Document 24 Filed 11/15/2005 Page 3 of 3