Yoya's Market, et al v. United States of America
AMENDED INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. Joint Status Report is due by 2/2/2021, in accordance with 26 . A Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set for 2/16/2021 at 02:00 PM before Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. [Parties shall call Judge Garza's AT&T Teleconference line at (877) 810-9415, follow the prompts, and enter access code 7467959, to be connected to the proceedings.] (ke)
Case 2:19-cv-00910-JAP-CG Document 27 Filed 01/06/21 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
YOYA’S MARKET and
ALMA VILLEZCAS, as manager,
No. CV 19-910 JAP/CG
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
AMENDED INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
This case is assigned to me for scheduling, case management, discovery, and all
other non-dispositive motions. Counsel are required to comply with the Local Civil Rules of
the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, as well as the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure. Civility, professionalism, and cooperation are required of counsel
throughout this litigation.
Counsel and any pro se parties will “meet and confer” no later than January 26,
2021, to discuss: (1) the nature and bases of their claims and defenses; (2) the possibility
of a prompt resolution or settlement; (3) making or arranging for complete initial
disclosures as required by Rule 26(a)(1); (4) preserving discoverable information; and (5)
the formulation of a provisional discovery plan. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1), (f). In formulating a
provisional discovery plan, counsel and pro se parties should meaningfully discuss: (i) the
subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and
whether discovery should be conducted in phases or limited to particular issues; (ii) any
issues about the disclosure, discovery, or preservation of electronically stored information,
including the form(s) in which it should be produced; (iii) any issues about claims of
privilege or confidentiality of materials, including exploring whether the parties can agree
on a procedure to assert these claims and whether they will ask the Court to include any
Case 2:19-cv-00910-JAP-CG Document 27 Filed 01/06/21 Page 2 of 3
agreement in an order; (iv) whether any changes should be sought to the limitations on
discovery imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Civil Rules; and (v)
the facts and the law governing the case to which the parties are willing to stipulate.
Pursuant to Rule 26(d)(2), the parties may deliver discovery requests under Rule 34
prior to the “meet and confer” date, however those requests are not considered to have
been served until the first “meet and confer” session.
Initial disclosures under Rule 26(a)(1) must be made within fourteen (14) days of
the meet and confer session, unless a different time is set by stipulation or court order. The
parties are advised to strictly follow the letter and spirit of Rule 26(a)(1) in preparing their
initial disclosures. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1). Initial disclosures are intended to accelerate the
exchange of core information about the case and eliminate the need for formal discovery
at the early stages of litigation. See 1993 Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(1). The parties must seek to meet these objectives in making their initial disclosures
and should be prepared to explain how they have fully complied with their obligations
under Rule 26(a)(1) at the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference.
The parties will cooperate in preparing a Joint Status Report and Provisional
Discovery Plan (“JSR”) which follows the sample JSR form available on the United States
District Court for the District of New Mexico’s website. All attorneys must show their
complete mailing address and telephone number(s) under the “Appearances” section of
the JSR. Do not indicate witnesses’ addresses as “in care of” an attorney’s office. The city
or town of residence of each witness must be included so that the trial judge can consider
that information in determining the trial location. The parties are to fill in the blanks for
proposed dates, bearing in mind that the time allowed for discovery is generally 120 to 180
days from the date of the Rule 16 Initial Scheduling Conference. The Court will determine
Case 2:19-cv-00910-JAP-CG Document 27 Filed 01/06/21 Page 3 of 3
actual case management deadlines after considering the parties’ requests. Plaintiff, or
Defendant in removed cases, is responsible for electronically filing the JSR by February 2,
Parties may not modify case management deadlines on their own. Good cause
must be shown, and the Court’s written approval obtained for any modification of the case
management deadlines that the Court establishes at the scheduling conference.
A Rule 16 Scheduling Conference will be conducted by telephone on February 16,
2021, at 2:00 p.m. Parties shall call Judge Garza’s AT&T Teleconference line at (877)
810-9415, follow the prompts, and enter the Access Code 7467959, to be connected to the
proceedings. Upon agreement, the parties may request that the Rule 16 Scheduling
Conference be held in person.
At the conference, counsel and any pro se parties must be prepared to discuss all
claims and defenses, initial disclosures, discovery requests and scheduling, issues relating
to the disclosure, discovery, or preservation of electronically-stored information, the timing
of expert disclosures and reports under Rule 26(a)(2), and the use of scientific evidence
and whether it is anticipated that a Daubert1 hearing will be needed. We will also discuss
settlement prospects and alternative dispute resolution possibilities. Lead counsel and
parties appearing pro se must participate unless excused by the Court. Parties
represented by counsel need not attend.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
THE HONORABLE CARMEN E. GARZA
CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
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?