PARENT v. U S CUSTOMS & BORDER PROTECTION et al

Filing 24

ORDER & REPORT OF CONFERENCE By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (lrc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
SANDRA PARENT, in her capacity as
Personal Representative of the ESTATE
OF NEIL BEGIN
Plaintiff,
v.
U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER
PROTECTION, ET AL.,

)
)
)
)
) Docket no. 1:11-cv-295-GZS
)
)
)
)
)
)

Defendants.

ORDER & REPORT OF CONFERENCE

In accordance with the Procedural Order (Docket # 16), the Court held a conference of
counsel on January 25, 2012.

Attorney Peter Kelly appeared for Plaintiff by telephone.

Attorney Evan Roth appeared for Defendants U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) and
U.S. Border Patrol Officers Robert Kipler and Rick Romann (the “CBP Officers”). Attorney
William Fisher appeared for Defendants State of Maine and Robert Flynn.

Following the

Conference, the Court hereby ORDERS that the following procedure be followed in connection
with Defendant’s motion for summary judgment:
On or before February 22, 2012, Defendants CBP and CBP Officers shall file motions
for summary judgment (the “Motions”). The Government will file a motion for substitution as
outlined in the December 13, 2011 Local Rule 56(h) Memorandum (Docket # 17) and further
outlined by Attorney Roth at the conference and also file for summary judgment. Plaintiff shall
file any objection to the Motions within 21 days of filing in accordance with Local Rule 7(b).
Any reply shall be filed in accordance with Local Rule 7(c). Defendants’ sought leave to exceed

the page limit, and the Court GRANTS Defendants’ request to file Motions of no more than 30
pages. Plaintiff is permitted to file an objection of no more than 30 pages.
The Court also expects the parties’ filings will comply with all aspects of Local Rule 56.
Attorney Roth indicated that he was prepared to file a statement of material facts of up to 30
paragraphs. The Court encourages the parties to file stipulations of fact that could serve to
streamline the parties’ statements of material fact. The Court welcomes joint stipulations of fact
and reminds the parties that they are free to indicate that any such stipulations are admissions
solely for purposes of the to-be-filed summary judgment Motions. See D. Me. Local Rule 56(g).
In addition to any stipulations of fact, the Court urges the parties to consider submitting a
single stipulated record of exhibits and deposition excerpts (if applicable) that all sides agree will
be referenced in the statements of material facts. The submission of a stipulated record does not
prevent either side from submitting additional documents with their respective statement of
material facts.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ George Z. Singal
United States District Judge
Dated this 25th day of January, 2012.

2