Van Valin et al v. Google, Inc.

Filing 2

Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order and Notice of Case Assignment to Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart. Discovery is to be completed by 9/14/2010. Joint Alternate Dispute Resolution Report is due by 10/14/2010. Pretrial Order is due by 10/14/2010. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart. (mkk)

Download PDF
Van Valin et al v. Google, Inc. Doc. 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Oregon Portland Division Vicki Van Valin et al, Plaintiff(s) vs. Google, Inc., Defendant(s). Civil Case Assignment Order (a) Presiding Judge: The above referenced case has been filed in this court and assigned for all further proceedings to: Presiding Judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hon. Janice M. Stewart Presiding Judge's Suffix Code* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ST *These letters must follow the case number on all future filings. Case No: 3:10-CV-557-ST (b) Courtroom Deputy Clerk: Questions about the status or scheduling of this case should be directed to Donna Ausbie at (503) 326-8057 or donna_ausbie@ord.uscourts.gov (c) Civil Docket Clerk: Questions about CM/ECF filings or docket entries should be directed to Marilyn Kirkland at (503) 326-8012 or Marilyn_Kirkland@ord.uscourts.gov. (d) Place of Filing: Pursuant to LR 3-3 all conventionally filed documents must be submitted to the Clerk of Court, Room 740, Mark O. Hatfield United States Courthouse, 1000 S.W. Third Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204. (See also LR 100-5) (e) Jurisdictional Authority of Magistrate Judges: (1) Pretrial Administration: In accordance with LR 72, the assigned United States Magistrate Judge is authorized to conduct all pretrial proceedings contemplated by 28 U.S.C. 646(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 without further designation of the court. Revised December 1, 2009 Civil Case Assignment Order Dockets.Justia.com (2) Trial by Consent and Appeal Options: In accordance with LR 73, 28 U.S.C. 646(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73, all United States Magistrate Judges in this district are certified to exercise civil jurisdiction in assigned cases and, with the consent of the parties, enter final orders on dispositive motions, conduct trial, and enter final judgment which may be appealed directly to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (instead of a district judge). (f) Consent to a Magistrate Judge: In accordance with 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73, all United States Magistrate Judges in the District of Oregon are certified to exercise civil jurisdiction in assigned cases and, with the consent of the parties, may also enter final orders on dispositive motions, conduct trial, and enter final judgment which may be appealed directly to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (instead of to a District Judge). Parties are encouraged to consent to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge by signing and filing the Consent to Jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge (a copy of the consent form is included with this assignment order). There will be no adverse consequences if a party elects not to consent to a Magistrate Judge. (g) District Court Website: Information about United States Magistrate Judges in the District of Oregon, local rules of practice; CM/ECF electronic filing requirements; responsibility to redact personal identifiers from pleadings, motions, and other papers; and other related court information can be accessed on the court's website at www.ord.uscourts.gov. Dated: May 17, 2010 /s/ D. Tippetts D. Tippetts, Deputy Clerk Mary Moran, Clerk of Court By: For: Revised December 1, 2009 Civil Case Assignment Order UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Oregon Portland Division Vicki Van Valin et al, Plaintiff(s) vs. Google, Inc., Defendant(s). Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order In order to facilitate and expedite discovery and the effective management of this case, the Court orders that: (a) Corporate Disclosure Statement: In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1, any non-governmental corporate party must file a corporate disclosure statement concurrently with the filing of a first appearance. (b) Initial Conference of Counsel for Discovery Planning: (1) Except in cases exempted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(B), upon learning the identity of counsel for Defendant(s), counsel for the Plaintiff(s) must initiate communications with counsel for Defendant(s). All counsel must then confer as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) within thirty (30) days after all Defendants have been served (See LR 26-1). Counsel should also discuss their client's positions regarding consent to a Magistrate Judge and Alternate Dispute Resolution options. If counsel for all of the parties agree to forgo the initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1), they can use the Court form issued with this order (See LR 26-2). Whether or not the parties agree to forgo the initial disclosures, they may seek discovery once the initial conference of counsel for discovery planning contemplated by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) has occurred (See LR 26-1). Case No: 3:10-CV-557-ST (2) (3) (4) Revised December 1, 2009 Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order (c) Rule 16 Court Conference for Scheduling and Planning: Counsel for Plaintiff(s) and for Defendant(s) must, during or promptly after the conference of counsel referred to in the prior paragraph, contact the assigned judge's deputy clerk and schedule a LR 16-2 conference for scheduling and planning. At the conference the parties will be prepared to discuss discovery, consent to a Magistrate Judge, scheduling or other issues presented by this action, including proposed modifications to the initial schedule set forth below (See LR 16-2). (d) Pretrial and Discovery Deadlines: At the Initial Discovery Planning Conference referenced in paragraph (b) above, counsel should attempt to agree on one or more dates when they must: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) File all pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a) and 15; Join all claims, remedies and parties pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 18 and 19; File all pretrial, discovery and dispositive motions; Complete all discovery; and Confer as to Alternate Dispute Resolution pursuant to LR 16-4(c). The dates agreed upon by counsel should be communicated to the Court, and the Court will then issue a scheduling order which may include the agreed upon dates and/or set a Rule 16 Conference. Until the Court enters a subsequent scheduling order, the deadline for items (1) through (5) above will be 120 days from the date of this order. (e) Pretrial Order Deadline: Unless otherwise ordered by the court, not later than 30 days from the date discovery is to be completed (item(4) above), counsel must lodge a Joint Pretrial Order (See LR 16-6), and file a Joint Alternate Dispute Resolution Report (See LR 16-4(d)). (f) Service of this Order: Counsel for the Plaintiff must serve this order, and all attachments, upon all other parties to the action. Dated: May 17, 2010 /s/ D. Tippetts D. Tippetts, Deputy Clerk Mary Moran, Clerk of Court By: For: Revised December 1, 2009 Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Oregon Portland Division Vicki Van Valin et al, Plaintiff(s) vs. Google, Inc., Defendant(s). Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) Discovery Agreement In accordance with LR 26-2, I state that the parties who have been served and who are not in default, have agreed to forego the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1). DATED: Signature: Name & OSB ID: e-mail address: Firm Name: Mailing Address: City, State, Zip: Phone Number: Parties Represented cc: Counsel of Record Case No: 3:10-CV-557-ST Revised December 1, 2009 Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) Discovery Agreement UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Oregon Portland Division Vicki Van Valin et al, Plaintiff(s) vs. Google, Inc., Defendant(s). Consent to Jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge and Designation of the Normal Appeal Route In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P 73(b), as counsel for the party (parties) identified below, I consent to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including entry of orders on dispositive motions, trial, and entry of final judgment. I understand that withholding consent will not result in any adverse consequences. In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(c), I agree that any appeal from a final order or judgment entered by a United States Magistrate Judge shall proceed directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and not to a District Judge of this Court. DATED: Case No: 3:10-CV-557-ST Signature: Name & OSB ID: e-mail address: Firm Name: Mailing Address: City, State, Zip: Phone Number: Parties Represented cc: Counsel of Record Revised December 1, 2009 Magistrate Consent Form US District Court Oregon Civil Case Management Time Schedules Local Rule LR 16-1(d) Event or Requirement Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order (with attachments) Initial Conference for Discovery Planning Time Frame Issued by the clerk's office at the time of filing, along with the summonses Within 30 days from service of the last defendant Scheduled by the assigned judge after the required LR 26.1 Discovery Conference Within 120 days from the date the discovery order is issued Within 120 days from the date the discovery order is issued Unless otherwise ordered by the court, within 120 days from the date the discovery order is issued Within 150 days from the date the discovery order is issued Unless otherwise modified pursuant to LR 16.6(a), within 150 days from the date the discovery order is issued Within ten (10) days after entry of a court order directing reference to a volunteer mediation Within seven (7) days after the conclusion of private ADR proceedings Promptly if no settlement is achieved Comment Required to be served on all parties by the filing party Held between parties Affirmative duty on all counsel to contact the assigned judge's courtroom deputy (See LR 16.2(a) Parties must confer with other attorneys and unrepresented parties to discuss ADR options Required in cases assigned to Judges Hogan and Jones Discovery deadlines are set forth in the Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order The parties must file a Joint ADR Report PTO filing deadline is established in the Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order Plaintiff's attorney is responsible for notifying the court Plaintiff's attorney is responsible for notifying the court Court appointed private or volunteer mediator is responsible for notifying the court LR 26-1 LR 16-2(a) Rule 16(b) Conference LR 16-4(c) ADR Conference Requirements Joint Status Report LR 16-2(e) Completion of Discovery LR 16-4(d) Joint ADR Report LR 16-6 Joint Pretrial Order LR 16-4(f)(1)(D) Notice to the Court that the Parties Are Unable to Select a Volunteer Mediator Notification of Private ADR Results Report of Court Appointed Private or Volunteer Mediation LR 16-4(h)(1) LR 16-4(h)(2) Revised December 1, 2009 Civil Case Management Time Schedules

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?