IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 8, 2013
4WALL LAS VEGAS, INC., PLAINTIFF,
MARK TRIEBWASSER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
On February 14, 2013, after all parties consented to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (dkt. nos. 8, 25, 26), the action was referred to the undersigned for all further proceedings and entry of final judgment. (Dkt. No. 27.)
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 and E.D. Cal. L.R. 240, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Within 28 days of this order, the parties shall meet and confer about the mandatory disclosures required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, if they have not already done so.
2. A status (pre-trial scheduling) conference is set for June 13, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 25 before the undersigned. All parties shall appear by counsel or in person if acting without counsel.
3. Not later than fourteen (14) days prior to the status conference, the parties shall file a joint status report briefly describing the case and addressing the following matters:
a. 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 their scheduling;
f. The report required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 outlining the proposed discovery plan and its scheduling, including disclosure of expert witnesses;
g. Future proceedings, including setting appropriate cut-off dates for discovery and law and motion, and the scheduling of a pretrial conference and trial;
h. Special procedures, if any;
i. Estimated trial time;
j. Modifications of standard pretrial procedures due to the simplicity or complexity of the proceedings;
k. Whether the case is related to any other cases, including bankruptcy;
l. Whether a settlement conference should be scheduled;
m. Whether counsel will stipulate to the undersigned acting as settlement judge and waive disqualification by virtue of his so acting, or whether they prefer to have a settlement conference conducted before another judge; and
n. Any other matters that may add to the just and expeditious disposition of this matter.
4. Failure to obey the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this court's Local Rules, or an order of this court, may result in dismissal of the action, a default judgment, or other appropriate sanctions.
5. Counsel are reminded of their continuing duty to notify chambers immediately of any settlement or other disposition. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 160. In addition, the parties are cautioned that pursuant to Local Rule 230(c), opposition to granting of a motion must be filed at least fourteen (14) days preceding the noticed hearing date. The Rule further provides that "[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if written opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party." Moreover, Local Rule 230(i) provides that failure to appear may be deemed withdrawal of the motion or of opposition to the motion, or may result in sanctions. Finally, Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court."
6. If the parties desire to have an early settlement conference prior to the scheduled status conference, the parties shall so advise the court in a joint stipulation for an early settlement conference. The parties' stipulation shall specify whether they consent to the undersigned acting as the settlement judge, waiving any disqualification by virtue of the undersigned as presiding judge also acting as the settlement judge; or whether they prefer having an early settlement conference conducted by another judge.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.