PENOBSCOT NATION v. SCHNEIDER et al

Filing 91

PROCEDURAL ORDER- Parties' proposed schedule for filing motions for summary judgment as well as any related Daubert/kumho motions due by 1/19/2015. By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (lrc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
PENOBSCOT NATION,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
JANET T. MILLS, et al.
Defendants.

Case No. 1:12-cv-254-GZS

PROCEDURAL ORDER
The Court has received and reviewed the Joint Submission (ECF No. 90) in response to the
Court’s March 11, 2014 Procedural Order (ECF No. 69). In light of the representations made
therein, the Court hereby notifies the parties that it will allow Daubert/Kumho motions to be filed
concurrently with the parties’ summary judgment motions and anticipates deciding any
Daubert/Kumho motions in conjunction with issuing a decision on any related motions for
summary judgment. To the extent that the Joint Submission contained a request from the State
Defendants and State Intervenors that they be allowed to file Daubert/Kumho motions and receive
a final decision on said motions prior to briefing the issues on which they intend to seek summary
judgment, the Court hereby denies that request.
Therefore, the Court anticipates that the proposed schedule that the parties file with the
Court on or before January 19, 2015 will allow for a party filing a response in opposition to any
motion for summary judgment to also simultaneously file any Daubert/Kumho motion that the
filer believes must be resolved in order to construct the factual record for purposes of the pending
motion for summary judgment.
With respect to the joint record that will accompany the to-be-filed motions, the parties
shall provide the Court with public documents that are cited in the papers but are not readily
accessible via on-line databases. To the extent that the parties wish additional guidance on how to
best provide the Court with the joint exhibits, the parties shall contact the Clerk’s Office with a
more detailed explanation as to the size of the documents in question as well as whether the

documents are searchable or scanned. To the extent that questions remain, the Court will address
these issues at the to-be-set status conference.
The Court recognizes that the State Intervenors are apparently prepared to file their
summary judgment motion posthaste. However, in an effort to streamline the record, the Court
believes it is best to have all motions for summary judgment filed simultaneously. Therefore, to
the extent that the Joint Submission can be read to suggest that the Court order a separate track for
briefing the State Intervenors’ motion for summary judgment, the Court declines that request.
Rather, the parties shall on or before January 19, 2015, file a proposed schedule for filing
all motions for summary judgment as well as any related Daubert/Kumho motions. To the extent
that any party anticipates exceeding the standard page limits or anticipates filing a statement of
material facts that exceed fifty (50) numbered paragraphs, the filing shall indicate the number of
pages or paragraphs requested. After the Court receives the parties’ proposed schedule on or
before January 19, 2015, the Court will set this matter for a status conference to finalize the
schedule for briefing the proposed motions as well as any other issues that must be resolved in
order to streamline the filing of the motions for summary judgment. Additionally, at this status
conference, the Court contemplates discussing the feasibility of convening a judicial settlement
conference before a final decision is issued on the to-be-filed motions.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ George Z. Singal
United States District Judge
Dated this 10th day of December, 2014.

2