Garrison et al v. Moore's Auto Sales et al
INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar. Joint Status Report is due by September 8, 2022. A telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set for October 4, 2022, at 1:30 p.m. MDT. Counsel must call Judge Vidmar 9;s AT&T Conference Line at (888) 363-4734 (access code: 4382538) to connect to the proceedings. 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 8/19/2022. (nlb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
CORY GARRISON, and
PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE
No. 22-cv-0091 GJF/SMV
JASON J. MOORE,
dba MOORE’S AUTO SALES,
INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER
This case is assigned to me for scheduling, case management, discovery, and all
non-dispositive motions. Both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, as well as the
Local Rules of the Court apply to this lawsuit. Civility and professionalism are required of
counsel. Counsel must read and comply with “A Lawyer’s Creed of Professionalism of the State
Bar of New Mexico.”
The parties, appearing through counsel or pro se, must “meet and confer” no later than
August 25, 2022, to formulate a Provisional Discovery Plan. Fed R. Civ. P. 26(f). At the
meet-and-confer session, the parties must 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) the disclosure, discovery, and preservation of electronically stored information,
including the form(s) in which it should be produced; (iii) any 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 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 21 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. 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 Fed. R.
Civ. P. 26(a)(1) 1993 advisory committee’s notes. The parties must 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 initial scheduling conference.
The parties will cooperate in preparing a Joint Status Report and Provisional Discovery
Plan (“JSR”), following the sample JSR available at the Court’s web site. 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. Plaintiff (or
Defendant in removed cases) is responsible for filing the JSR by September 8, 2022.
The Court will determine actual case management deadlines after considering the parties’
requests. Parties may not modify case management deadlines on their own. Good cause must be
shown and the Court’s express and written approval obtained for any modification of the dates in
the Scheduling Order.
A Rule 16 initial scheduling conference will be held by telephone on October 4, 2022, at
1:30 p.m. MDT. The parties must call the Court’s AT&T Conference Line, (888) 363-4734
(access code: 4382538), to connect to the proceedings. At the conference, counsel and any pro se
parties must be prepared to discuss their JSR; all claims and defenses; initial disclosures;
discovery requests and scheduling; issues relating to the disclosure, discovery, and preservation
of electronically stored information; the timing of expert disclosures and reports under
Rule 26(a)(2);1 and the use of scientific evidence and whether it is anticipated that a Daubert2
hearing will be needed. We will also discuss settlement prospects, alternative dispute resolution
possibilities, and consideration of consent pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Lead counsel and
parties appearing pro se must participate unless excused by the Court. Parties represented by
counsel need not attend.
Pre-trial practice in this case shall be in accordance with the foregoing.
In preparing the JSR, counsel should be familiar with the Rule 26 requirements concerning disclosure of expert
testimony for witnesses who do not provide a written report. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C).
See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 590–92 (1993).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the deadlines shall be as follows:
Meet and Confer by:
August 25, 2022
JSR filed by:
September 8, 2022
Initial Disclosures due within 21 days of the
meet-and-confer session, but in no event later than:
September 15, 2022
Telephonic Rule 16 Initial Scheduling Conference:
October 4, 2022, at 1:30
STEPHAN M. VIDMAR
United States Magistrate Judge
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?