Lombardo v. American Airlines, Inc.

Filing 12

ORDER Denying 11 Proposed Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order. Order Requiring Attorney Certifications. Certifications due 3/2/15. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 2/23/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10
ALBERTO LOMBARDO,
11
Plaintiff(s),
12
vs.
13
AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,
14
Defendant(s).
15
16
17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:14-cv-02095-JCM-NJK
ORDER DENYING PROPOSED
DISCOVERY PLAN (Docket No. 11)
ORDER REQUIRING ATTORNEY
CERTIFICATIONS

Pending before the Court is the parties’ Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order, Docket
No. 11, which is DENIED for the reasons discussed below.

18

First, proposed discovery plans must state the number of days sought for discovery calculated

19

from the date the first defendant answers or otherwise appears. Local Rule 26-1(e)(1). The parties failed

20

to do so, and instead state the discovery period in terms of the number of months calculated from the

21

date of the Rule 26(f) conference. See Docket No. 11 at 2.

22

Second, the presumptively reasonable discovery period is 180 days calculated from the date the

23

first defendant answers or otherwise appears. See Local Rule 26-1(e)(1). When the parties seek a longer

24

discovery period, they must indicate “SPECIAL SCHEDULING REVIEW REQUESTED” on the face

25

of the proposed discovery plan. Local Rule 26-1(d). The parties failed to do so.

26

Third, when a discovery period is sought that is longer than 180 days calculated from the date

27

the first defendant answers or otherwise appears, the parties must provide a statement of the reason(s)

28

why they seek a longer time period. Local Rule 26-1(d). The parties failed to do so.

1

Fourth, the proposed discovery plan misstates Local Rule 26-4, in that it provides that requests

2

to extend deadlines in the scheduling order need only be filed 20 days before the discovery cut-off. See

3

Docket No. 11 at 2. Local Rule 26-4 requires that any request to extend deadlines set forth in the

4

scheduling order must be submitted at least 21 days before the subject deadline. For example, any

5

request to extend the deadline for initial expert disclosures must be filed at least 21 days before the

6

expiration of that deadline. Such a request filed only 20 days before the discovery cut-off would be

7

untimely.

8

For the reasons discussed more fully above, the parties’ proposed discovery plan is DENIED.

9

The parties shall file, no later than March 2, 2015, a proposed discovery plan that complies with the

10

applicable local rules. Moreover, in an effort to ensure future compliance and complete understanding

11

of the Local Rules, the Court hereby ORDERS attorneys John Keating, Garnet Beal, and Alan

12

Westbrook to file a certification with the Court no later than March 2, 2015, indicating that they have

13

read and comprehend Local Rules 26-4 and 26-1. Counsel are advised that similar violations in the

14

future may result in the imposition of sanctions.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

DATED: February 23, 2015

17
18

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2