Gilless v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada

Filing 9

INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea. Telephonic Rule 16(c) Hearing set for 12/5/2017 at 10:30 AM in Las Cruces. Joint Status Report due by 11/29/2017. Unless otherwise notified by the Clerk or the Court, a notice of consent or non-consent for this case to proceed before the trial Magistrate Judge should be submitted by each party no later than 11/21/2017. (sls)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
TONI GILLESS,
Plaintiff,
v.

No. 2:17-cv-931-CG-KRS

SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY
OF CANADA,
Defendant.

INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
This case is before the Court for scheduling, case management, discovery, and other nondispositive matters. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, as well as the Local
Rules of the Court, will apply to this lawsuit.
The parties, appearing through counsel or pro se, shall “meet and confer” no later than
November 15, 2017, to formulate a provisional discovery plan. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). As
part of this process, the parties are reminded that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f)
requires them to exchange views on the “disclosure, discovery, or preservation of
electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be
produced.” The parties have an attendant duty to preserve all electronically stored
information that may be discoverable in this case.
The time allowed for discovery is generally 120 to 180 days. The parties will cooperate in
preparing a Joint Status Report and Provisional Discovery Plan (“JSR”) that follows the sample
available on the Court’s website.1 The blanks for suggested/proposed dates in the JSR are to be

1

Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 06-173, the JSR replaces and supersedes the Provisional Discovery Plan and
the Initial Pretrial Report, effective January 2, 2007. The standardized Joint Status Report and Provisional
Discovery Plan is available at www.nmd.uscourts.gov/forms from the drop-down menu.

Page 1 of 3

filled in by the parties. Actual dates will be promulgated by order of the Court to be entered after
the Rule 16 scheduling conference scheduled pursuant to this order. Plaintiff, or Defendant in
cases which have been removed from State District Court, is responsible for filing the JSR by
November 29, 2017.
Initial disclosures by a party pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)
shall be made within fourteen days after the meet-and-confer session.
A telephonic Rule 16 scheduling conference will be conducted on December 5, 2017 at
10:30 a.m.2 Counsel and parties pro se shall call [phone] to be connected to the
conference. The referenced conference telephone line can only accommodate up to five (5)
telephone calls at once, including the call-in to the telephone conference by the Court. In the
event the number of calls into the telephonic scheduling conference will exceed four from
counsel and parties, counsel or parties pro se must contact the Court immediately so that
alternative arrangements can be made.
At the Rule 16 scheduling conference, counsel and parties pro se should be prepared to
discuss discovery needs and scheduling, all claims and defenses, the use of scientific evidence,
whether a Daubert3 hearing is necessary, initial disclosures, and the time of expert disclosures
and reports under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). The Court, counsel and parties pro se
will also discuss settlement prospects and alternative dispute resolution possibilities. In addition,
the scheduling conference participants will address consideration of consent by the parties to a
United States Magistrate Judge presiding over dispositive proceedings, including motions and

2

If counsel or parties wish to appear in person at the scheduling conference, please advise the undersigned’s
chambers at least 48 hours prior to the scheduling conference. If counsel or parties are going to appear in person at
the scheduling conference, you will appear at the United States District Courthouse, Picacho Courtroom, Room 480,
4th floor, 100 N. Church Street, Las Cruces New Mexico, unless otherwise noted on the court docket.
3
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).

Page 2 of 3

trial, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Parties represented by counsel may, but are not required
to, attend the telephonic scheduling conference.
If service on all parties is not complete, Plaintiff(s) appearing through counsel or pro se
is/are responsible for notifying all parties of the content of this order.
Good cause must be shown and the express written approval obtained from the Court for
any modifications of the dates in the scheduling order that issues from the JSR.
Pretrial practice in this case shall be in accordance with the above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

_____________________________________
KEVIN R. SWEAZEA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Page 3 of 3