Johnson v. The Capital Offset Company, Inc. et al

Filing 61

ORDER granting 57 Motion to Continue Trial and discovery deadlines. Mediating parties' request that Acme be compelled to participate in mediation 56 is denied. Parties are placed on notice that the court expects them to engage in mediation at some point prior to trial. So Ordered by Judge Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.(dae)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Alford Johnson
v.

Civil No. 11-cv-459-JD

The Capital Offset
Company, Inc., et al.
O R D E R
The Capital Offset Company, Inc. filed an assented-to motion
to continue the trial date and to amend the scheduling order.
Alford Johnson, Capital Offset, Jay Stewart, Stephen Stinehour,
and Susan Cox filed a joint mediation statement in which they
state that they have agreed to participate in private mediation
and ask the court to order Acme Bookbinding Company, Inc. to
participate in mediation with them.

Acme filed a separate

mediation statement, stating that Acme preferred to complete
discovery and seek summary judgment before incurring the expense
of mediation.

I.

Motion to Continue and Amend Scheduling Order
As amended, the discovery plan in this case set June 17,

2013, as the trial date, and the discovery deadline on April 15,
2013.

The deadline for dispositive motions is March 15, 2013.

In the assented-to motion, the parties ask that the trial
date be moved from June 17, 2013, to the first available date
after December 1, 2013.

They also ask that the schedule be

changed so that the dispositive motion deadline would be May 15,
2013, challenges to expert testimony would be due by May 15,
2013, and the close of discovery deadline would be sixty days
before trial.
The trial date will be continued to the first available date
after December 1, 2013.

The discovery deadlines are also

extended as the parties have agreed.

II.

Mediation
Based on the mediation statements, the parties, other than

Acme, agreed to participate in private mediation in January.

The

mediating parties included a request in their mediation statement
that the court order Acme to participate in mediation.

A

mediation statement is not an appropriate means for requesting
affirmative relief.

See LR 7.1(a)(1).

In addition, Acme states

that mediation now, before dispositive motions have been filed,
is premature.
Even if the mediating parties had filed a motion to compel
Acme to participate in mediation, the court is not inclined to
order mediation at this time.

However, the parties are placed on
2

notice that the court expects them to engage in mediation at some
point prior to trial.

Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the parties’ assented to motion
to continue the trial date and to extend certain deadlines
(document no. 57) is granted.
The mediating parties’ request that Acme be compelled to
participate in mediation, which was included in their joint
mediation statement (document no. 56) is denied.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________
Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.
United States District Judge
January 30, 2013
cc:

Jennifer Turco Beaudet, Esquire
Lawrence F. Boyle, Esquire
Elsabeth D. Foster, Esquire
Thomas J. Pappas, Esquire
Arnold Rosenblatt, Esquire
Mark W. Shaughnessy, Esquire
William N. Smart, Esquire

3