Jarzab et al v. KM Enterprises, Inc. et al

Filing 144

ORDER APPROVING PARTIES' SCHEDULE, DIRECTING A MEET-AND-CONFER ON FRIDAY, APRIL 4 ABOUT THE TIMING OF THE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND SETTING FORTH THE PROCESS FOR THE MANDATORY SUBMISSION OF A JOINT STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS WITH THE OPENING BRIEFS (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(Beeler, Laurel) (Filed on 4/3/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

Northern District of California

10

San Francisco Division
JAMES T. JARZAB, et al.,

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

Plaintiffs,
v.

No. C 11-06671 LB
ORDER APPROVING DISCOVERY
PLAN AND SCHEDULE

13
KM ENTERPRISES, INC., et al.,
14
15

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

16
17

The court approves the parties’ schedule in ECF No. 142. There are two issues.

18

First, the court previously proposed the filing of cross-motions for summary judgment

19

sequentially. The parties said they did not want to do this because it would cut into their page limits.

20

If the parties elect that process (for example, to queue up legal issues earlier), the court will not

21

reduce the page limits. That will result in the following page limits: Opening Motion for Summary

22

Judgment (25); Opposition and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (25 and 25 for a total of 50);

23

Reply and Opposition to Summary Judgment Motion (15 and 25 for a total of 40); and Reply (15).

24

The parties must confer by telephone about this on Friday, April 4, 2014 and submit any revised

25

schedule by Monday, April 7, 2014.

26
27
28

Second, the court has changed its standing order about how to file joint statements of undisputed
fact. The new standing order is attached and provides for the following process:
Motions for summary judgment must be accompanied by a joint statement of the material facts
that the parties agree are not in dispute. The parties’ briefs must cite to that joint statement,
C 11-06671 LB
ORDER

1
2
3
4
5
6

which must be filed simultaneously with the opening brief. The joint statement must include –
for each undisputed fact – citations to admissible evidence. The parties must comply with the
procedures set forth in Civil Local Rule 56-2(b). The parties may not file – and the Court will
not consider – separate statements of undisputed facts. Failure to stipulate to an undisputed fact
without a reasonable basis for doing so may result in sanctions. See Civil L. R. 56-2(b). If the
parties cannot work out a reasonable process for drafting the joint statement, they must use the
following process: (1) four weeks before the filing date, the moving party proposes its
undisputed facts, and (2) one week later, the responding party replies and the parties meet and
confer about any disagreements. If the parties have any problems, they must schedule a
telephone conference call with the court at least one week before the motion is filed. For
oppositions, a responding party must identify and propose any additional undisputed facts to the
moving party within seven days. The moving party must respond within two business days.

7
8

The parties must comply with this new process.

9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

Dated: March 27, 2014
_______________________________
LAUREL BEELER
United States Magistrate Judge

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

C 11-06671 LB
ORDER

2