ORDER SETTING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with a civil rights complaint that was filed in the Sacramento County Superior Court on October 16, 2008. Named defendant Officer Meier removed the action to this court on November 7, 2008. The action has been assigned to United States District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr., and has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21) for all purposes encompassed by that provision.
The Clerk of the Court has informed plaintiff and the removing defendant that they may, if all parties consent, proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge for all purposes while preserving their right to appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. An appropriate form for consent has been provided. Any party choosing to consent may complete the form and return it to the Clerk of the Court at any time. Neither the magistrate judge nor the district judge handling the case will be notified of the filing of a consent form unless and until all parties to the action have filed consent forms.
Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. A Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is set for January 16, 2009, at 11:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 27, before Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd.
2. Each party shall appear at the Status Conference by counsel or, if proceeding in propria persona, on his or her own behalf. Parties may appear at the conference in person or telephonically. To arrange telephonic appearance, the party shall contact Pete Buzo, the courtroom deputy of the undersigned magistrate judge, at (916) 930-4128 no later than three days before the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference.
3. Plaintiff shall file and serve a status report on or before December 31, 2008, and defendants shall file and serve a status report on or before January 9, 2009. Each status report shall address all of the following matters:
a. Progress of service of process;
b. Possible joinder of additional parties;
c. Possible amendment of the pleadings;
d. Jurisdiction and venue;
e. Anticipated motions and the scheduling thereof;
f. Anticipated discovery and the scheduling thereof, including disclosure of expert witnesses;
g. Future proceedings, including the setting of appropriate cut-off dates for discovery and for law and motion, and the scheduling of a final pretrial conference and trial;
h. Modification of standard pretrial procedures specified by the rules due to the relative simplicity ...