Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lesley E. Phillips v. Washington Mutual Bank Fa

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 24, 2011

LESLEY E. PHILLIPS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK FA,
DEFENDANT.

ORDER SETTING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE

On January 10, 2011, plaintiff paid the required filing fee and filed a complaint concerning a mortgage loan. The action was assigned to the undersigned for all purposes encompassed by Local Rule 302(c)(21).

Good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. A Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is set for Friday, May 20, 2011, at 11:00 a.m. at the United States District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California, in Courtroom No. 27 before the undersigned;

2. Within fourteen (14) days after plaintiff is served with this order, plaintiff shall serve a copy of the order on defendant. Within five (5) days after serving copies of this order on defendant, plaintiff shall file with the court a certificate of service indicating the date and manner of service of this order on defendant;

3. Any party may appear at the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference telephonically if the party pre-arranges such appearance by contacting Pete Buzo, the courtroom deputy of the undersigned magistrate judge, at (916) 930-4128 at least 48 hours before the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference;

4. Plaintiff shall file and serve a status report on or before May 6, 2011, and defendant shall file and serve a status report on or before May 13, 2011. Each party's 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 or complexity of the action;

i. Whether the case is related to any other case, including matters in bankruptcy;

j. Whether the parties will stipulate to the magistrate judge assigned to this matter acting as settlement judge, waiving any disqualification by virtue of his so acting, or whether they prefer to have a Settlement Conference before another magistrate judge;

k. Whether the parties intend to consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge; and

l. Any other matters that may aid in the just and expeditious disposition of this action;

5. The pro se plaintiff is informed that failure to file a timely status report or failure to appear at the status conference in person or telephonically may result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed for lack of prosecution and as a sanction for failure to comply with court orders and applicable rules. See Local Rules 110 and 183; and

6. The pro se plaintiff is cautioned that Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a defendant must be dismissed if service of process is not accomplished on that defendant within 120 days from the date the complaint is filed.

DAD:kw Ddad1\orders.prose\phillips0089.ossc

20110124

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.