Christians in the Workplace Networking Group v. National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC et al.

Filing 22

SCHEDULING ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea. Discovery due by April 28, 2023. Dispositive Motions due by May 30, 2023. (atc)

Download PDF
Case 1:22-cv-00267-DHU-KRS Document 22 Filed 09/15/22 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO CHRISTIANS IN THE WORKPLACE NETWORKING GROUP, Plaintiff, v. No. 1:22-cv-267 DHU/KRS NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS OF SANDIA, LLC; ESTHER HERNANDEZ; AARON JIM; and BIANCA HILL, Defendants. SCHEDULING ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court following a telephonic Rule 16 scheduling conference held on September 15, 2022. At the hearing, the Court adopted the parties’ proposed Joint Status Report and Provisional Discovery Plan, with slight modifications, as reflected in the dates below Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall adhere to the following discovery plan: (a) Maximum of thirty (30) interrogatories by each party to any other party, with responses due thirty (30) days after service. (b) Maximum of twenty-five (25) requests for admission by each party to any other party, with responses due thirty (30) days after service. (c) Maximum of ten (10) depositions by Plaintiff and ten (10) by Defendants. Each deposition limited to maximum of seven (7) hours unless extended by agreement of parties. Scheduling Order Page 1 of 3 Case 1:22-cv-00267-DHU-KRS Document 22 Filed 09/15/22 Page 2 of 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following case management deadlines shall govern: (a) Deadline for Plaintiff to amend pleadings and join additional parties pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15: December 30, 2022; (b) Deadline for Defendants to amend pleadings and join additional parties pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15: January 30, 2023; (c) Deadline for Plaintiff’s expert reports: January 30, 2023; (d) Deadline for Defendants’ expert reports: February 28, 2023; (e) Termination of discovery: April 28, 2023; (f) Deadline for supplementing discovery/disclosures: Due within thirty days of receipt of information giving rise to the need to supplement; (g) Motions relating to discovery: May 18, 2023; (h) All other motions:1 May 30, 2023; (i) Pretrial order: To be set by the presiding judge. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court must approve any changes to the timing or scope of discovery, other than the parties’ agreement to extend the length of a deposition made during the deposition in question. Requests by a party to change the timing or scope of discovery, other than a mutual agreement to extend a deposition reached during the deposition, must be made by motion and before the termination of discovery or the expiration of any applicable deadline. Discovery must be completed on or before the termination of the discovery deadline. A written discovery request must be propounded by a date which ensures that the 1 This deadline applies to motions related to the admissibility of experts or expert testimony that may require a Daubert hearing, but otherwise does not apply to motions in limine. The Court will set a motions in limine deadline in a separate order. Scheduling Order Page 2 of 3 Case 1:22-cv-00267-DHU-KRS Document 22 Filed 09/15/22 Page 3 of 3 response to that request is due on or before the discovery deadline. The parties are further reminded that the cutoff for motions related to discovery does not relieve the party of the twentyone (21) day time period under Local Rule 26.6 to challenge a party’s objections to answering discovery. The parties are encouraged to review Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) to ensure they properly disclose all testifying witnesses, not just those for whom a report is required. ______________________________ KEVIN R. SWEAZEA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Scheduling Order Page 3 of 3

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?