IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 12, 2012
HUMPHREY LAU, PLAINTIFF,
KATHI PYLMAN, ET AL, DEFENDANTS.
ORDER SETTING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE
This case has been referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On December 21, 2011, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations recommending that defendants' motion to dismiss be granted in part. (Doc. No. 31.) On February 17, 2012, the assigned District Judge issued an order adopting the December 21, 2011 findings and recommendations in full. (Doc. No. 34.)
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 Friday, June 8, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. at the United States District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California, in Courtroom No. 27 before the undersigned;
2. Any party may appear at the status conference telephonically. To arrange telephonic appearance, the party must contact Pete Buzo, courtroom deputy to the undersigned, at (916) 930-4128 not later than 48 hours before the status conference. A land line telephone number must be provided for the court's use in placing a call to the party appearing telephonically;
3. Plaintiff shall file and serve a status report on or before May 25, 2012, and defendants shall file and serve a status report on or before June 1, 2012. Each status report shall address all of the following matters, if applicable to this case:
a. Progress of service of process;
b. Possible joinder of additional parties;
c. Any expected or desired 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 assigned magistrate judge 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.
4. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file a timely status report, or failure to appear at the status conference either in person or telephonically, may result in a recommendation that this action 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.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.