Sirsi Corporation v. Craven-Pamlico-Carteret Regional Library System
SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 1/31/2012. Motions due by 3/1/2012.Signed by Magistrate Judge David W. Daniel on 9/6/11. (Tripp, S.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
doing business as SIRSIDYNIX,
This matter is before the court on the Discovery Plan filed by the parties on August 31, 2011
[DE-18]. The Discovery Plan has been considered by the court and found to be reasonable.
Accordingly, the Discovery Plan is APPROVED AND ORDERED with the following critical
All discovery will be concluded by January 31, 2012;
All potentially dispositive motions will be filed by March 1,2012; and
This matter will be set for trial by separate order from Judge Terrence W.
Boyle. Pursuant to the August 20, 2002 Standing Order entered by Judge
Boyle, the Court reserves the right to schedule the case for trial as early as
thirty (30) days after the dispositive motion deadline.
A trial calendar indicating the order in which cases will be called for trial will be distributed
two months before trial.
At the same time, a final pretrial conference will be scheduled
approximately two weeks before trial.
The remaining provisions of the Discovery Plan not inconsistent with the foregoing are
approved and adopted as this court's order.
Any Defendant who makes an appearance after this scheduling order has been entered shall
be required to confer with opposing counsel within 20 days after the Defendant's appearance in the
case. Such Defendant will be bound by the discovery provisions contained in this order unless the
Defendant petitions the court by motion to amend this order.
Supplementation under Rule 26(e) must be made promptly after receipt of the information
by the party or counsel but in no event later than the close of discovery. In addition, motions to join
additional parties and to amend pleadings must be made promptly after the information giving rise
to the motion becomes known to the party or counsel.
Counsel are reminded that on consent of all of the parties, and with the concurrence of the
district judge, this case may be referred to a magistrate judge for jury or bench trial with a
peremptory trial setting and with the right of direct appeal to the Fourth Circuit. A copy of the
consent form may be obtained from the Clerk.
This case is subject to mandatory mediation, pursuant to Local ADR Rule 101.1 a(b). Ifthe
parties are able to agree on a mediator, they shall file a statement identifying the selected mediator
and meeting the other applicable requirements within 21 days after entry ofthis Order, in accordance
with Local ADR Rule 101.1 c(a). If a statement is not timely filed, the Clerk will appoint a mediator
from the list ofcourt-certified mediators, in accordance with Local ADR Rule IOI.Ic(b). The parties
are also reminded that on request, this court will assist with settlement negotiations or other ADR
such as summary jury trial by making available a judge other than the trial judge to explore these
A... c f\,CJ
This the ~ day of September, 2011.
DAVID W. DANIEL
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?