West v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. et al

Filing 52

ORDER approving 48 Discovery Plan. Length of Trial 12 - 15 days. Case Track: Complex. Affirmative defenses stricken as outlined. Defendant Goodrich Pump to amend paragraph 29 of its Answer. Court will not hold oral argument on Circor's motion to dismiss unless requested by the parties on or before 11/24/10. So Ordered by Judge Joseph N. Laplante. Summary Judgment Motions due by 7/2/2012. Dispositive Motion Filing Deadline 2/1/2011. Mediation Follow Up on 4/2/2012. (dae)

West v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. et al

Doc. 52

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Kurt West v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., et al. Civil No. 10-cv-00214-JL

ORDER AFTER PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in chambers on November 16, 2010. The Discovery Plan (document no. 48) is approved as submitted, with the following changes: · DeBenedetto discovery deadline - December 15, 2011 · 30(b)(6) witness depositions are limited to a total of 21 hours per party-deponent, or 8 hours per designee · 7 1/2 hour limit on non-party deposition (5 hours for direct examination) Based on the discussions between the court and counsel at the conference, the following are stricken without prejudice to being reinstated on request if warranted by the evidence: · the following affirmative defenses: Bell's preemption,

"Pennsylvania law," and "Delaware law," defenses (to the extent

Dockets.Justia.com

they were asserted as "affirmative defenses"); Rolls Royce's estoppel, waiver and unclean hands defenses. Defendant Goodrich Pump will amend ¶ 29 of its Answer to more clearly indicate its position. A letter to counsel of

record will suffice, and will constitute an amendment to its Answer. Jurisdiction. The court will not hold oral argument on

Circor's motion to dismiss unless requested by the parties on or before November 24, 2010. Summary Judgment. The parties and counsel are advised that

compliance with Rule 56(e) and Local Rule 7.2(b), regarding evidentiary support for factual assertions, and specification and delineation of material issues of disputed fact, will be required. Discovery disputes. Discovery disputes will be handled by

the undersigned judge, as opposed to the Magistrate Judge, in the normal course. No motion to compel is necessary. The party or

counsel seeking discovery-related relief should confer with adverse counsel to choose mutually available dates, and then contact the Deputy Clerk to schedule a conference call with the court. The court will inform counsel and parties what written

materials, if any, should be submitted in advance of the conference call. 2

Customary motions to compel discovery, while disfavored by the undersigned judge, are nonetheless permissible. If counsel

prefer traditional discovery litigation to the conference call procedure set forth above, any such motion to compel should expressly request, in the title of the motion, a referral to the United States Magistrate Judge. normally be granted. Such referral requests will

If the Magistrate Judge is recused,

alternate arrangements will be made.

SO ORDERED. ____________________________ Joseph N. Laplante United States District Judge Dated: cc: November 19, 2010

Annmarie A. Tenn, Esq. Joan A. Lukey, Esq. Joan P. O'Flanagan, Esq. L. Robert Bourgeois, Esq. Brian M. Quirk, Esq. Garry R. Lane, Esq. James C. Wheat, Esq. Phillip S. Bixby, Esq. Martha C. Gaythwaite, Esq.

3