Sandoval v. RLI Insurance Company
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ORDER entered requiring joint proposed pretrial schedule filed no later than 11/20/17. (Zierk, Marsha)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-12054
RLI INSURANCE CO.
NOTICE OF INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
Consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and L.R. 16.1, the parties are
ORDERED to engage in initial case management as follows.
A. Meet and Confer. The parties are to meet and confer no later
than 11/16/17, to
(1) prepare a proposed pretrial schedule for the case that includes
a plan for discovery, and
(2) consider whether they will consent to trial by a magistrate
judge, or agree to mediation through the ADR program sponsored by the
Court. If the parties consent to trial by a magistrate judge, they should
so indicate in their joint statement under Paragraph B.
B. Joint Statement. The parties are to file, no later than 11/20/17, a
joint statement containing a proposed pretrial schedule, which shall include:
(1) A joint discovery plan scheduling the time and length for all
discovery events that shall:
(a) conform to the obligation to limit discovery set forth in
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b);
(b) take into account the desirability of conducting phased
discovery in which the first phase is limited to developing
information needed for a realistic assessment of the case and, if
the case does not settle, the second phase is directed to
information needed to prepare for trial; and
(c) consider the need for a protective order in the case, and
if such an order is necessary, set a time to submit a joint proposed
order to the court.
(2) If appropriate, a proposed agreement governing the
preservation and production of electronically stored information
(ESI), including but not limited to, the extent and duration of the
preservation obligation and the format in which relevant ESI will be
produced (native, tagged image file format (TIFF), or portable
document format (PDF)).
(3) A proposed schedule for the filing of motions.
(4) Certifications signed by counsel and an authorized
representative of each party affirming that each party and that party’s
(a) conferred with a view to establishing a budget for the
costs of conducting the full course – and various alternative
courses – of the litigation;
(b) considered the resolution of the litigation through the
use of alternative dispute resolution programs such as those
outlined in LR 16.4; and
(c) complied with the requirements of Paragraph C infra.
(5) If the proposed plan for discovery extends beyond 270 days,
a statement of any exceptional circumstances justifying an
enlargement of the time the Court will ordinarily permit for discovery
and, where appropriate, the filing of dispositive motions.
(6) In all patent cases, the parties are to consult the “Model
Scheduling Order for Patent Cases” set out in LR 16.6.
To the extent that all parties are able to reach agreement on a proposed
pretrial schedule, they shall so indicate. To the extent that the parties differ
on the pretrial schedule, they shall set forth separately the items on which
they differ and indicate the nature of the disagreement. One purpose of the
parties’ proposed pretrial schedule or schedules is to advise the judge of the
parties’ best estimates of the amounts of time they will need to accomplish
specified pretrial steps. The parties should be aware that it is the
court’s practice not to grant enlargements of the prescribed
pretrial schedule beyond the date mandated for trial or for the
filing of dispositive motions. The parties’ proposed pretrial schedule or
schedules will be considered by the Court as advisory only. If the parties
believe that an early status conference with the court will aid in the efficient
resolution of significant issues in the case, the parties may identify these
issues and make such a request in their joint statement.
C. Settlement Proposal and Response. Plaintiff[s] shall present
written settlement proposals to all defendants no later than 11/13/17. Defense
counsel shall have conferred with their clients on the subject of settlement and
respond to plaintiff within 7 days of the proposal.
Failure to comply with this Order may result in the imposition of
sanctions including the dismissal of the Complaint.
RICHARD G. STEARNS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DATED: November 6, 2017
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?