Black vs. Ruiz, et al.

Filing 18

SCHEDULING ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Lourdes A. Martinez. Amended Pleadings due by 2/28/2017. Discovery due by 6/1/2017. Joinder of Parties due by 2/28/2017. Pretrial Motions due by 7/13/2017. Proposed Pretrial Order due to the Court by 10/16/2017. (atc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
TIMOTHY BLACK,
Plaintiff,

v.

No. CIV-16-1165 GBW/LAM

LUIS RUIZ and DONA ANA COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS,
Defendants.

SCHEDULING ORDER
THIS MATTER came before the Court on a telephonic Rule 16 Initial Scheduling
Conference held on February 1, 2017. Following a review of the parties’ Joint Status Report and
Provisional Discovery Plan, and after conferring with counsel, the Court adopts the Joint Status
Report and Provisional Discovery Plan modified as follows:
a)

Maximum of twenty-five (25) Interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, per
side (responses due 30 days after service);

b)

Maximum of twenty-five (25) Requests for Admission per side (responses due 30
days after service);

c)

Maximum of thirty-five (35) Requests for Production per side (responses due 30
days after service);

d)

Maximum of five (5) depositions by Plaintiff(s) and five (5) depositions by
Defendant(s); and

e)

Depositions of named parties and experts are limited to 7 hours, unless extended by
agreement of the parties; depositions other than of named parties and experts are
limited to 4 hours unless extended by agreement of the parties.

The following case management deadlines have been set:
a)

Deadline for Plaintiff(s) to amend pleadings or add additional
parties pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15, which may require
opposing party’s written consent or leave of Court:
February 15, 2017

b)

Deadline for Defendant(s) to amend pleadings or add additional
parties pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15, which may require
opposing party’s written consent or leave of Court:
February 28, 2017

c)

Plaintiff(s)’ Rule 26 (a)(2) expert disclosure1:

April 3, 2017

d)

Defendant(s)’ Rule 26 (a)(2) expert disclosure1:

May 1, 2017

e)

Termination date for discovery:

June 1, 2017

f)

Motions relating to discovery to be filed by:

June 22, 2017

g)

Pretrial motions other than discovery motions (including
motions which may require a Daubert hearing) filed by:

July 13, 2017

Pretrial Order: Plaintiff(s) to Defendant(s) by:
Defendant(s) to Court by:

October 2, 2017
October 16, 2017

h)

Any extension of the case management deadlines must be approved by the Court. Any
requests for additional discovery must be submitted to the Court by motion prior to the expiration
of the discovery deadline. These deadlines shall be construed to require that discovery be
completed on or before the above date. Service of interrogatories or requests for production shall
be considered timely only if the responses are due prior to the deadline. A notice to take
1

All expert witnesses must be disclosed by this date, but only those who are retained or specifically employed
to provide expert testimony must submit an expert report. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B); Musser v. Gentiva Health
Servs., 356 F.3d 751 (7th Cir. 2004); Farris v. Intel Corp., 493 F.Supp. 2d 1174 (D.N.M. 2007), and Blodgett v. United
States, 2008 WL 1944011 (D. Utah). Expert witnesses not required to provide a written report must provide a
summary disclosure under Rule 26(a)(2)(C) by this date. The parties must have their expert(s) ready to be deposed at
the time they identify them and provide their reports.

2

deposition shall be considered timely only if the deposition takes place prior to the deadline. The
pendency of dispositive motions shall not stay discovery. The deadline for motions relating to
discovery (including, but not limited to, motions to compel and motions for protective order) shall
not be construed to extend the twenty-one (21) day time limit in D.N.M. LR-Civ. 26.6. See
D.N.M. LR-Civ. 7 for motion practice requirements and timing of responses and replies. If
documents are attached as exhibits to motions, affidavits or briefs, those parts of the exhibits that
counsel want to bring to the attention of the Court must be highlighted in accordance with D.N.M.
LR-Civ. 10.6. Counsel are directed that the Pretrial Order will provide that no witnesses except
rebuttal witnesses whose testimony cannot be anticipated, will be permitted to testify unless the
name of the witness is furnished to the Court and opposing counsel no later than thirty (30) days
prior to the time set for trial. Any exceptions thereto must be upon order of the Court for good
cause shown.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________________________________________
LOURDES A. MARTÍNEZ
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3