Rognirhar v. Southern et al

Filing 5

ORDER pursuant to General Order No. 2007-12: All pro se civil cases that are assigned to a district judge for trial, whether filed by a prisoner or not, are herewith exempted from the disclosure and conference requirements of F.R.Civ.P. 26, except in pending cases where a scheduling order (or packet) or progression order has been previously issued, the parties shall abide by such scheduling or progression orders. In the future, it will not be the practice of the court to issue scheduling packets in pro se civil cases assigned to district judges. Instead, it will be the practice to issue a progression order, addressing discovery and other issues, approximately 30 days after the last defendant has answered. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)

Rognirhar v. Southern et al

Doc. 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA IN RE: PROGRESSION OF PRO SE C IV IL CASES ASSIGNED TO DISTRICT JUDGES AND THE D ISC LO SU R E AND CONFERENCE R E Q U IR E M E N T S OF FEDERAL RU LE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 26. ) ) ) ) ) ) G EN ER AL ORDER No. 2007­12

Pursuant to General Order No. 2007-09, various provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, the law more generally, and in my capacity as the supervising judge for pro se cases in the District of Nebraska, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. E xce pt as provided in paragraphs 3 and 4, effective immediately, all pro se civil cases (where the plaintiff is proceeding without a lawyer) that are assigned to a district judge for trial, whether filed by a prisoner or not, are herewith exempted from the disclosure and conference requ irem ents of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. See e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)-(3) & (f). In the future, it will not be the practice of the court to issue scheduling packets in pro se civil cases assigned to district judges. Instead, it will be the practice to issue a progression order, addressing discovery and other issues, approximately 30 days after the last defendant has answ ered. No discovery in pro se civil cases assigned to a district judge shall take place until such a progression order is entered unless permitted by the court. Requests to engage in discovery prior to the issuance of a such an order must be made by motion. T his order pertains to pending and future cases provided that in pending cases where a schedu ling order (or packet) or progression order has been previously issued, the parties shall abid e by such scheduling or progression orders. T his order does not pertain to: criminal cases, cases involving a motion to return property pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41, any type of forfeiture case, habeas corpus case s brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241 or 2254, cases involving motions filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, cases challenging the imposition of the death penalty, bankruptcy cases or app eals, social security appeals, civil cases where the parties have consented to proceed before a magistrate judge and an order of reference has been entered, or cases where when one of the plaintiffs or one of the petitioners has retained counsel and counsel has entered an appearance or the court has appointed counsel for one of the plaintiffs or one of the petitioners. A ugust 6, 2007. B Y THE COURT: s/Richard G. Kopf U nited States District Judge and Supervising Pro Se Judge

2.

3.

4.

Dockets.Justia.com