Individual Practices — Judge Display

Home --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Home Judges --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Judges expand_more Judicial Absence --> Judicial Absence Motion Schedule --> Motion Schedule Mediation Program for the Western Division --> Mediation Program for the Western Division Rules --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Rules expand_more Local Rules --> Local Rules Federal Rules --> Federal Rules Internal Operating Procedures --> Internal Operating Procedures Internal Operating Procedures (PDF) --> Internal Operating Procedures (PDF) General Orders --> General Orders Alternative Dispute Resolution (Western Division) --> Alternative Dispute Resolution (Western Division) Pattern Jury Instructions --> Pattern Jury Instructions Local Rule 78.5 Request for Decision/Status Report --> Local Rule 78.5 Request for Decision/Status Report Mediation Program for the Western Division --> Mediation Program for the Western Division Local Rules for ADR --> Local Rules for ADR Clerk's Office --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Clerk's Office expand_more Operations --> Operations Judicial Support --> Judicial Support Information Systems --> Information Systems Administrative Services --> Administrative Services Human Resources --> Human Resources Attorney --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Attorney CM/ECF --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> CM/ECF expand_more Register for CM/ECF --> Register for CM/ECF CM/ECF User Guide --> CM/ECF User Guide CM/ECF Quick Reference Guide --> CM/ECF Quick Reference Guide CM/ECF Training Videos --> CM/ECF Training Videos CM/ECF Password Reset Request --> CM/ECF Password Reset Request General Order on Electronic Case Filing --> General Order on Electronic Case Filing Written Opinions --> Written Opinions Recently Filed Cases --> Recently Filed Cases Access to CM/ECF for the Northern District of Illinois --> Access to CM/ECF for the Northern District of Illinois Daily Calendars --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Daily Calendars Jurors --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Jurors MDL --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> MDL Forms --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Forms Pro Se / Representing Yourself --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Pro Se / Representing Yourself expand_more Pro Se Forms --> Pro Se Forms Federal Civil Case Forms --> Federal Civil Case Forms Guide to Filing a Case in Federal Court Without an Attorney --> Guide to Filing a Case in Federal Court Without an Attorney Guide to Understanding the Federal Courts --> Guide to Understanding the Federal Courts Settlement Assistance Program --> Settlement Assistance Program Settlement Assistance Program Appearance Form --> Settlement Assistance Program Appearance Form Illinois Legal Aid Online – Pro Se Resources --> Illinois Legal Aid Online – Pro Se Resources Pro Se Filer PDF Submissions --> Pro Se Filer PDF Submissions Receive Notices of Electronic Filings by Email --> Receive Notices of Electronic Filings by Email William J. Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program Help Desk --> William J. Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program Help Desk Schedule an Appointment with the Hibbler Help Desk --> Schedule an Appointment with the Hibbler Help Desk Media --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Media Naturalization, Civics Education & Community Outreach --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Naturalization, Civics Education & Community Outreach expand_more Civics Education --> Civics Education Court History Documentary --> Court History Documentary Naturalization Ceremony --> Naturalization Ceremony Court History Museum --> Court History Museum Court Lectures --> Court Lectures About the Court --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> About the Court expand_more History of the Court --> History of the Court Proper forms of identification and items not allowed in Courthouses. --> Proper forms of identification and items not allowed in Courthouses. Divisional County Map --> Divisional County Map Careers --> Test : www.ilnd.uscourts.gov --> Careers close Home » Judges » Judge Information District Judges Magistrate Judges Emergency Judges Order Transcript Judge Alexakis Alonso Appenteng Aspen Bass Ehler Berry III Blakey Bucklo Chang Coleman Cummings Daniel Dow Jr. Durkin Ellis Fuentes Gettleman Gilbert Gottschall Guzman Harjani Holleb Hotaling Hunt Iasparro Jantz Jenkins Johnston Kendall Kennelly Kim Kness Kocoras Lefkow McLaughlin McNally McShain Pacold Pallmeyer Perry Reinhard Rowland Schneider Seeger Shah Tharp Jr. Valderrama Valdez Weisman Wood Select Judge Alexakis Alonso Appenteng Aspen Bass Ehler Berry III Blakey Bucklo Chang Coleman Cummings Daniel Dow Jr. Durkin Ellis Fuentes Gettleman Gilbert Gottschall Guzman Harjani Holleb Hotaling Hunt Iasparro Jantz Jenkins Johnston Kendall Kennelly Kim Kness Kocoras Lefkow McLaughlin McNally McShain Pacold Pallmeyer Perry Reinhard Rowland Schneider Seeger Shah Tharp Jr. Valderrama Valdez Weisman Wood Judge Steven C. Seeger meeting_room Courtroom: 2319 gavel Chambers: 2378 phone Telephone: (312) 435-5588 fax Fax: error Important Information The Court expects counsel to read and comply with all of its case management procedures.  The Standing Orders will help ensure the prompt, efficient, and fair resolution of cases, and will keep things moving in an orderly fashion. When filing a motion, parties should not file a notice of motion.  That’s the old way of doing things in this district.  The Northern District of Illinois suspended the practice of filing a notice of motion a few years ago.  See General Order 21-0027, as amended.  Under the current rules, parties should simply file the motion, without noticing the motion for a hearing on a specific date.  If a party has a question about the status of the motion (or anything else), then counsel can contact the Courtroom Deputy by email, [email protected] , as stated in this Court’s Standing Order.  Counsel and parties must not call Chambers to check on the status of a motion or ask questions about the case, absent unusual circumstances.      summarize Case Procedures event Calendar Schedule date_range Motion Schedule groups Chambers Staff Judge Steven C. Seeger --> Procedures to be followed in cases assigned to Judge Steven C. Seeger Amended Complaints chevron_right print When filing an amended complaint, a plaintiff must file a redline as an attachment, so that all changes are readily apparent to the parties and the Court. This rule does not apply to pro se litigants. Consent to Proceed before a Magistrate Judge chevron_right print Every case has an assigned Magistrate Judge.  In civil cases, the parties may consent to have the assigned Magistrate Judge try the case.  In many cases, consent to refer the entire case to the Magistrate Judge may offer significant efficiencies and greater certainty in scheduling the trial.  All counsel in civil cases should inform their clients of this option and discuss it with opposing counsel. Magistrate Judge Consent Form Contacting the Court chevron_right print Unless directed by the Court, counsel and pro se litigants must not communicate with the Court about the case by phone, letter, or email (excluding submitting a proposed order).  For example, do not call chambers to ask about the status of a motion, or to ask if you need to file something.  Calling chambers inevitably interrupts the Court from working on some other case. All communications with the Court itself must take place through a filing on the docket, properly noticed and served on opposing counsel.  Cover letters with courtesy copies are acceptable, however.  If a party has questions about scheduling, a potential filing, the status of motions, or the logistics of trial, contact the Courtroom Deputy, Jessica J Ramos, at  [email protected]  or (312) 818-6594.  In general, the Courtroom Deputy, not the Court, is the go-to person for any questions. If there is a problem at a deposition, and counsel believes that it requires an immediate call to the Court, counsel must first read this Court’s Standing Order entitled Depositions. Courtesy Copies chevron_right print The Court requires a courtesy copy of all complaints and all motions (longer than five pages), memorandums, and exhibits.  See Local Rule 5.2(f). Please mail or deliver a courtesy copy in the box outside the Courtroom Deputy’s office, located at Room 2316A.  Please do not bring courtesy copies to Chambers.  A delivery signature will not be available. Courtesy copies should always be printed from ECF after electronic filing so that the copies include the ECF header. The Court prefers documents to be stapled rather than bound on the left-hand side, unless the size of the document makes the use of a staple impossible. Depositions chevron_right print This Standing Order applies to all cases assigned to Hon. Steven C. Seeger, including any cases referred to the Magistrate Judges for supervision of discovery.  The Court enters this Standing Order to exercise reasonable control over the mode of witness examinations and the presentation of evidence, so as to promote the search for truth, avoid wasting time, and protect witnesses from harassment and undue embarrassment.  See Fed. R. Evid. 611(a); Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(3)(B).               1.         First and foremost, discovery is about the search for truth.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 1; Fed. R. Evid. 102.  Depositions, in turn, are one of the primary tools for unearthing the truth.  Depositions also help parties streamline cases, narrow disputes, avoid surprises, and prepare for trial.  Simply put, depositions are one of the most valuable parts of litigation.             2.         This Court will consider any effort to obstruct a deposition – say, by making speaking objections, or giving improper instructions not to answer, or coaching the witness – as an attempt to undermine the truth-seeking function of litigation.              3.         “Litigation is not a contest to see how much trouble you can cause your opponents.  Those who treat it as such do so at their peril.”  See Hal Commodity Cycles Mgmt. Co. v. Kirsh , 825 F.2d 1136, 1139 (7th Cir. 1987).                     4.         Counsel who wish to participate in depositions, and experts who hope to testify at trial, must comply with this Standing Order. Civility             5.         Counsel must behave professionally at all times during depositions.  Depositions must be civil, and attorneys must be respectful to witnesses, to the court reporter, and to other attorneys.  Counsel must conduct themselves as if the Court were present, and as if the jury were watching.   See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(c)(1).             6.         Don’t be rude.  Don’t fight.  Don’t obstruct. Questioning the Witness             7.         Treat the witness with respect at all times.             8.         Counsel must not interrupt a witness who is answering the question.  By asking a question, counsel has passed the baton (and the microphone) to the witness.  Let the witness finish.              9.         If the questioning attorney interrupts, the attorney for the witness can insist that the witness be allowed to complete his or her answer.             10.       If the witness repeatedly filibusters, the witness may become eligible for extra deposition time.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(1).  So there is no reason to interrupt.             11.       A questioning attorney should not ask the same question over and over again.  But if the attorney does so, the remedy is to invoke the rule of completeness at summary judgment or trial.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(a)(6).  If necessary, counsel for the witness can seek a protective order if the questioning attorney “unreasonably annoys” or “oppresses” the witness.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(3)(A).               12.       Do not deliberately mislead the witness with false information.  Do not mischaracterize what the witness previously said.  Do not attempt to trick the witness.  If the attorney for the witness believes that the questioning attorney is deliberately mischaracterizing the facts or the testimony, counsel should take a break and confer.  After the deposition, the Court may entertain a motion as necessary.              13.       Counsel taking and defending the deposition should avoid reiterating or paraphrasing what the witness just said.  It almost always creates confusion and trouble.  When the questioning attorney paraphrases the testimony, it is common for the summary to be not quite accurate or complete, which only leads to disputes.  The transcript will speak for itself.  On the flipside, the attorney defending the deposition should avoid repeating prior testimony because it can be a way to signal what future testimony should be.   Avoid saying “you previously told me ‘X,’” or “the witness already testified that ‘Y.’”             14.       Don’t make faces.  Don’t roll your eyes.  Don’t laugh at the witness.  Don’t make editorial comments.      Objections             15.       All too often, attorneys make lengthy objections to coach the witness, suggest answers, burn the clock, or throw the questioning attorney off track.  The Court will view such objections as an attempt to undermine the truth-seeking function of depositions.             16.       Counsel shall not make speaking objections.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(c)(2).  Counsel must not coach witnesses, make lengthy objections, or say anything that interferes with the fair examination of the deponent.             17.       Counsel may object to the form of a question by making short, simple objections.  Objections must be “concise[],” as the Federal Rules command.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(c)(2).  Acceptable objections include “object to the form,” “objection; form,” and “object to the form of the question.”  Such short-and-simple objections preserve any and all objections to the form of the question, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(d)(3)(B), including (1) leading; (2) vague; (3) ambiguous; (4) argumentative; (5) lack of personal knowledge; (6) lack of foundation; (7) calls for speculation; (8) calls for a legal conclusion; (9) assumes facts not in evidence; (10) misstates the facts, or the testimony; (11) hearsay; (12) compound; (13) the document speaks for itself; and so on.                18.       Unless expressly asked, counsel shall not object by articulating all of the many reasons why a question is perceived to be defective.  Making one specific objection – such as “objection; leading” or “objection; foundation” – is acceptable.  A single, targeted objection gives the questioning attorney an opportunity to cure.  But stringing together more than one specific objection is not.  If counsel has more than one objection to a question, simply say “objection; form.”  Examples of inappropriate objections include: “Objection, form, lacks foundation, calls for speculation, and legal conclusion.” “Objection.  Incomplete hypothetical, completely irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and the form of the question.  Go ahead and do what you can.” “Objection.  That completely mischaracterizes what he just said, and we can read it back.  He just testified that ‘X.’” “Objection.  I’m objecting to the form and the foundation and it mischaracterizes his testimony.  It would be one thing if he had said ‘X,’ but that’s not what it was.  He asked ‘Y,’ and your question intentionally muddies that and mischaracterizes it so there’s no foundation and I object to the form.” “Objection to the form, lack of foundation, objection to the speculation and now argumentative because he’s asked and answered that question.  You’re just arguing with him now.” “Objection.  Mischaracterizes his testimony and mischaracterizes the document.  The document speaks for itself.” “Objection.  Lacks foundation.  Calls for speculation.  If you know, you can say that but no one is interested in you guessing.” “Objection.  Form.  Lacks foundation.  May call for a legal conclusion.  You can answer it if you can and if you know.”                 19.       If the questioning attorney wants clarification about the nature of an objection (say, to cure the problem), then counsel is free to ask.  That is, the questioning attorney can ask the objecting attorney to explain the objection and thus request an opportunity to “correct[]” the “form of a question . . . at the time.”  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(d)(3)(B)(i).  And if the questioning attorney asks for clarification, and thus invites a more fulsome explanation, then the objecting attorney may provide it.  Otherwise, counsel must make short, direct objections – and nothing else.             20.       The Court will view interjections by counsel such as “if you know,” “if you remember,” “if you understand,” or “if you have personal knowledge” as an attempt to coach the witness.  It is unsurprising that witnesses typically testify that they can’t remember after they hear “if you remember.”  And they almost always say that they don’t know after counsel blurts out “if you know.”  Such coaching-by-thinly-veiled-instruction violates this Standing Order.             21.       Improper objections are deemed to be no objections at all (when it comes to preservation).  At summary judgment or at trial, the Court may treat deposition objections to be waived if they violate this Standing Order.             22.       “Asked and answered” is not an appropriate objection during depositions, absent truly abusive conduct in extraordinary cases.  It coaches the witness to say nothing more than what he or she has said already.  All too often, when an attorney objects “asked and answered” during a deposition, the witness hasn’t actually answered the question.             23.       As a reminder, the Federal Rules allow an instruction not to answer “only when necessary to preserve a privilege, to enforce a limitation ordered by the court, or to present a motion [for a protective order] under Rule 30(d)(3).”  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(c)(2); Redwood v. Dobson , 476 F.3d 462 (7th Cir. 2007).  If there is a dispute about an instruction not to answer, move on and complete the rest of the deposition.  Preserve the issue on the record for later resolution by the parties or the Court.             24.       Unlike an objection to form, an objection to relevance “is not waived by a failure to make the objection before or during the deposition, unless the ground for it might have been corrected at that time.”  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(d)(3)(A).             25.       There is no reason for multiple parties on the same side to make the same objection.  It clutters the transcript, and slows things down.  Consider making a stipulation that an objection by one is an objection for all.             26.       Counsel have more latitude in making objections on the grounds of privilege.  For example, attorneys may instruct a witness that they can testify about “X,” but cannot testify about “Y.”  Counsel retain the ability to make reasonable privilege objections, which sometimes require giving explanations or defining the parameters of testimony.             27.       It is acceptable for counsel defending the deposition to make reasonable, succinct requests for clarification.  Sometimes questions are generally unclear, and a modest clarification can clear things up.  For example, it is acceptable to ask the questioning attorney to clarify what month or year he or she is asking about (if the time period matters), especially when the questioning attorney moves back and forth between different time periods.  As a second example, asking the questioning attorney to clarify who “he,” “she,” or “they” refer to is acceptable, too.  As a final example, it is acceptable to ask the questioning attorney about the origin or completeness of an exhibit if, for example, it (1) lacks a bates number; (2) is missing an attachment; (3) appears to be an improper compilation of different documents; or (4) otherwise appears improper, incomplete, or over-inclusive.  But such requests for clarification must be unobtrusive, in good faith, and (hopefully) rare. Evasive or Incomplete Answers             28.       Under the Federal Rules, an “evasive or incomplete disclosure, answer, or response must be treated as a failure to disclose, answer, or respond.”  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(4).  Witnesses must give direct answers to straightforward questions.  The Court will treat evasive deposition testimony as a failure, if not a refusal, to testify.             29.       A witness who gives evasive answers may become eligible for extra deposition time, among other remedies.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 37.              30.       Experts must comply with discovery obligations, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B), and must participate in discovery in good faith.  That rule fully applies to depositions.             31.       Experts have no special license to be evasive.  Quite the contrary.  The Federal Rules set one rule, and it applies to all witnesses, fact and expert alike:  evasive answers are no answers at all.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(4).  An expert who gives evasive answers has, in effect, refused to participate in discovery in good faith.              32.       Parties should not expect to call at trial experts who have not participated in depositions in good faith.  In rare cases, the Court may take into account the evasiveness of deposition testimony when deciding whether an expert is allowed to take the witness stand. Depositions under Rule 30(b)(6)             33.       Depositions under Rule 30(b)(6) pose special challenges and impose significant burdens.  A party who seeks to take a 30(b)(6) deposition must serve a limited number of narrowly tailored requests.  The requesting party must specify the topics with “reasonable particularity,” see Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6), so that the receiving party has a clear understanding of what information is requested.              34.       The number and scope of the topics must be proportional to the “needs” – needs – of the case.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1).             35.       The presumptive limit is 10 topics.  Subtopics count.             36.       Be reasonable.  If the requesting attorney goes overboard on the number and scope of the topics, the Court may decide that the party cannot take any 30(b)(6) deposition at all.  So the requesting party has an incentive to seek what it really needs, and nothing else.              37.       Depositions under Rule 30(b)(6) are not an opportunity to redo other depositions or obtain a second (sound)bite at the apple.              38.       Before taking a 30(b)(6) deposition, consider whether the information “can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive.”  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C)(i).             39.       A 30(b)(6) deposition is designed to discover facts, not legal theories or contentions.  If a party wants more information about another party’s positions, serve a contention interrogatory at the appropriate time.  A party cannot take a 30(b)(6) deposition on legal theories or contentions without leave of Court.             40.       Understand the requirements of the rule.  A party requesting a 30(b)(6) deposition is not entitled to select the person who will testify on behalf of the entity.  A party requesting a 30(b)(6) deposition is not entitled to the “most knowledgeable” witness, either.  Instead, the “named organization” that provides corporate testimony under Rule 30(b)(6) is entitled to “designate” the person who will “testify on its behalf.”  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6).  An entity has the discretion to present “one or more” representative deponents.  Id.   The entity must educate the designated witness before the deposition as necessary.  A 30(b)(6) deposition is the testimony of the entity itself, not the testimony of an individual.  A 30(b)(6) witness does not need to have personal knowledge over the topics.  Instead, he or she testifies in a corporate capacity based on “information known or reasonably available to the organization.”  Id.             41.       Absent leave of Court or an agreement between the parties, a party must provide a copy of all exhibits for a 30(b)(6) deposition to all other parties at least one week before the deposition.             42.       Parties cannot take depositions under Rule 30(b)(6) of government agencies acting in their enforcement capacity without leave of Court.  For example, a party would need leave of Court to take a 30(b)(6) deposition of the FTC when the FTC files suit to enforce the consumer-protection laws, or a 30(b)(6) deposition of the EEOC when the EEOC enforces the anti-discrimination laws.  See SEC v. Buntrock , 217 F.R.D. 441 (N.D. Ill. 2003); SEC v. SBM Inv. Certificates, Inc. , 2007 WL 609888 (D. Md. 2007); SEC v. Rosenfeld , 1997 WL 576021 (S.D.N.Y. 1997); SEC v. Morelli , 143 F.R.D. 42 (S.D.N.Y. 1992); EEOC v. Evans Fruit Co., Inc. , 2012 WL 442025 (E.D. Wash. 2012); EEOC v. McCormick & Schmick’s Seafood Restaurants, Inc. , 2010 WL 2572809 (D. Md. 2010); FTC v. U.S. Grant Resources, LLC , 2004 WL 1444951 (E.D. La. 2004).   The government does not have first-hand knowledge of any facts when it acts in an enforcement capacity.  Instead, the government relies on facts gathered during an investigation, often by lawyers.  Taking a 30(b)(6) deposition in that scenario inevitably raises work-product issues, and creates far more trouble than it is worth.  There are better ways to obtain information from the government.  This rule does not apply when the government is a defendant. Scheduling, Time, and Breaks             43.       Counsel must cooperate in the scheduling of depositions.  Counsel who serve deposition notices must make reasonable efforts to accommodate the schedules of the witness and other counsel.  If the date proposed in a deposition notice is problematic for counsel or the witness, then the counsel or witness with the scheduling conflict must propose several reasonable alternate dates, and do so promptly ( i.e., within a few days).  There is no pocket veto when it comes to scheduling.  A failure to propose alternate dates within a reasonable time may be a waiver of the right to object to the date in the deposition notice.              44.       The seven-hour rule under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not include breaks.  “Preoccupation with timing is to be avoided.”  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30 advisory committee’s note to 2000 amendment.              45.       Cooperate when it comes to allocating time, especially when the case involves multiple parties or the depositions of third parties.  Before the first deposition, confer about how to allocate time for all depositions in the case, especially if the parties expect them to last a full day.  Be fair and share time.              46.       Absent agreement of the parties, or leave of Court, depositions must take place on weekdays (excluding holidays) during normal business hours.                   47.       A witness cannot take a break while a question is pending (just like trial). When to Come to Court             48.       In light of this Standing Order, the Court expects that conflicts at depositions will be rare.  If an attorney violates this Standing Order, the first step for the other attorney is simple:  remind counsel of this Court’s Standing Order.             49.       The Court expects that attorneys will almost never need to enlist the Court’s assistance during depositions themselves.  If necessary, parties should raise disputes by filing a motion after the deposition.  In extreme cases, counsel can call Chambers during depositions.  This Standing Order is not an invitation to call the Court anytime an attorney acts improperly.  Unless things get truly out of hand, a written motion is a more effective way to present a dispute to the Court. Summary             50.       Above all else, be professional and reasonable, and follow the Rules.   Discovery chevron_right print Motions The Court believes that parties can and should work out most discovery disputes.  The Court expects the parties to make a genuine, good-faith effort to resolve disagreements before filing a discovery motion.  The Court will not hear or consider any discovery motion or non-dispositive dispute unless the movant has complied with the “meet and confer” requirement of Local Rule 37.2.  The motion must state with specificity when and how the movant compiled with Local Rule 37.2.  Compliance with the Local Rules requires a good faith effort to resolve discovery disputes, including communications that take place in person or by phone.  The exchange of emails or letters will not normally be sufficient to comply with the Local Rules.  Motions that do not comply with the Local Rules may be stricken. If a party requests a meet and confer, the other party must respond promptly and participate in a meet and confer in a reasonable time.  There is no pocket veto when it comes to having a meet and confer. If an impasse arises about the recovery of electronically stored information, no discovery motion may be filed unless the parties first meet and confer to determine whether the requested material can be retrieved and, if so, the most effective way of doing so.  Such a conference must take place in person or by phone, and must be attended by an IT representative of the party (or, for a putative class, an IT representative of plaintiffs’ counsel) that served the request and an IT representative of the party that received the request. All parties should be fully prepared to argue any discovery motion on the date that it is presented.  The Court may rule on discovery motions after hearing argument at the motion call and without briefing.  If the non-moving party believes that it is important to file a written response to the motion, the non-moving party should request that opportunity at the outset of the hearing.  If, after hearing argument, the Court believes that the motion requires briefing, the Court will set an expedited briefing schedule so that the matter can be resolved quickly.  Parties must immediately notify the Court if they are withdrawing any previously filed discovery motions. Motions to Dismiss The pendency of a motion, such as a motion to dismiss, does not operate as a stay of discovery. Sequence of Discovery Parties are reminded that there is no “order” in which discovery must occur.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d)(3).  One party’s failure or inability to respond to discovery will not excuse any other party’s non-compliance.  Boilerplate Instructions and Definitions Boilerplate “instructions” and “definitions” shall not be used in interrogatories, document requests, and requests to admit.  For example, absent special circumstances, there is no need to define the term “document.”  Such instructions and definitions rarely accomplish anything useful, and they merely add unnecessarily to the cost of litigation.  Boilerplate instructions and definitions need not be considered in responding to discovery. A requesting party can define terms of art or other phraseology that has special meaning based on the unique facts of the case.  Otherwise, the parties should use plain English, and should assume that requests mean what the words mean in common usage and in light of the context of the case.  If there is genuine uncertainty, the parties should clarify the meaning during a meet and confer. Boilerplate Objections Objections to written discovery must state with specificity the grounds for objecting.  See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4) (“The grounds for objecting to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(B) (“For each item or category, the response must . . . state with specificity the grounds for objecting to the request, including the reasons.”).  That is, the objecting party must offer a particularized reason, tailored to each request.    Boilerplate objections are inadequate, and count for nothing.  For example, a generic assertion that a discovery request is “overbroad” or “unduly burdensome” – without an accompanying explanation – is the same as not objecting at all.   Evasive Discovery Responses The Court expects parties to respond to discovery requests in a straightforward manner, without evasiveness.  The Court reminds the parties that, under the Federal Rules, an “evasive or incomplete disclosure, answer, or response must be treated as a failure to disclose, answer, or respond.”  Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(4). Civility The Court will take note if a party is repeatedly inflexible or uncourteous when it comes to extensions, return dates, scheduling matters, and so on.  For example, be reasonable when the due date is near the holidays.  Show respect to opposing counsel and to the other party.  Emergency Motions chevron_right print Emergency motions must be “of such a nature that the delay” in hearing them “would cause serious and irreparable harm to one or more parties.”  Local Rule 77.2 (emphasis added). Requests to set a hearing on an emergency motion shall be made to the Courtroom Deputy, Jessica J Ramos, with as much advance notice as possible.  Unless the motion seeks an ex parte temporary restraining order under Rule 65(b)(1), parties must make all reasonable efforts to give actual notice to opposing counsel. Experts chevron_right print The parties must follow the following procedures governing experts, unless otherwise ordered by the Court:             1.         A party must disclose all persons presenting testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(A).   See   Musser v. Gentiva Health Servs.,  356 F.3d 751, 756-58 (7th Cir. 2004).             2.         A party must disclose all experts within the time limit set for disclosure of Rule 702 opinion witnesses (or experts) in the scheduling order or, in the absence of an order, within the time periods prescribed in Rule 26(a)(2)(C).             3.         The Rule 26(a)(2)(A) disclosure must specifically designate the witness as a person who may give testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, and/or 705.  Even if the witness is not subject to the report requirement of Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the Rule 26(a)(2)(A) identification disclosure must include a written statement containing all Rule 702 opinions to be offered by that witness and the bases for those opinions in such a manner as to permit the opposing party to consider whether to depose the witness, to challenge the witness’ qualifications or opinions under  Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc ., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), or to retain rebuttal opinion witnesses.   See Musser, 356 F.3d at 757-58.             4.         Please keep in mind that “[d]isclosing a person as a witness and disclosing a person as an expert witness are two distinct acts.”  Musser , 356 F.3d at 757.             5.         Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a written report from certain categories of witnesses –  namely, witnesses who are  retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony  or employees of a party whose duties regularly include giving expert testimony.  If a witness falls within the scope of Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the witness must comply fully with all of the report requirements of that Rule.             6.         A treating professional, including a physician, nurse, psychologist, or similarly situated witness, must be disclosed pursuant to Rule 26(a)(2)(A) in order to present testimony under Rule 702.   See   Musser , 356 F.3d at 756.  A treating professional is not considered a retained expert for purposes of Rule 26(a)(2), and thus need not submit a report, if the treating professional’s testimony (a) is based on observations made during the course of treatment, (b) was not “acquired or developed in anticipation of litigation or for trial,” and (c) is based on personal knowledge.   See   Zurba v. United States , 202 F.R.D. 590, 591 (N.D. Ill. 2002).  In other words, it is only when the treating physician gives opinions beyond the scope of the physician’s own observation and treatment that the physician is considered a “retained” expert for purposes of Rule 26(a)(2)’s report requirement.   Id.  at 592.  Thus, the fact that a treating physician proposes to offer opinion testimony on prognosis, causation, or permanency of injuries does not automatically render the physician a retained expert for Rule 26(a)(2) purposes.  Id .  However , a report is required if a treating physician’s proposed testimony – regardless of the specific subject of the testimony ( i.e., prognosis, causation, permanency, etc.) – “goes beyond his personal involvement in the facts of the case and giv[es] an opinion formed because there is a lawsuit,” absent leave of Court based on “undue hardship.”  Griffith v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad , 233 F.R.D. 513, 518-519 (N.D. Ill. 2006).             7.         A party must comply with Rule 26(a)(2) and this Court’s procedures set forth above before designating a Rule 702 opinion witness (or expert) as a trial witness in the final pretrial order.             8.         A party must file any motions challenging Rule 702 witnesses under  Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc ., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), at least sixty (60) days before trial unless otherwise ordered by the Court.   Initial Status Conferences and Joint Initial Status Reports chevron_right print The Court will set all newly-filed cases for an initial status hearing approximately 75 days after the filing of the complaint.  The initial status hearing will be the scheduling conference as required by Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b); see also Local Rule 16.1 (“the initial status hearing shall be the scheduling conference referred to in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16”).  The parties must meet and conduct a planning conference as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f).  After conferring, the parties must submit two things to the Court. First , the parties must file a Joint Initial Status Report, not to exceed seven pages, at least seven days before the initial status hearing.  The Joint Initial Status Report is the “discovery plan” required by Rule 26(f).  The Joint Initial Status Report shall provide the information listed in the template below.  Joint Initial Status Report Under Rule 26(f) If defense counsel has not yet filed an appearance, plaintiff’s counsel should prepare the status report.  The parties must deliver a copy of the Initial Status Report to the Courtroom Deputy’s drop-box outside room  2316A no later than one week before the initial status hearing. Second , the parties must submit a Word version of a proposed scheduling order under Rule 16(b) to the Court’s proposed order mailbox, [email protected] . The template for the proposed scheduling order is here: Scheduling Order Under Rule 16(b) . At that point, the Court will adopt or modify the proposed plan, as necessary. Use the templates.  The parties simply need to fill in the blanks. At the initial status hearing with the Court, the parties should be prepared to discuss the nature of the case, report on the possibility of settlement, and discuss the nature and length of discovery necessary to prepare the case for trial.  The Court may set a discovery cut-off date at the initial conference. In some cases, the scheduled status conference may take place before a defendant has responded to the plaintiff’s complaint.  The Court expects all defendants who have been served with process to participate in this conference even if they have not yet responded to the complaint. Injunctions chevron_right print When proposing an injunction, please pay special attention to the text of Rule 65(d). The Seventh Circuit requires an injunction to be on a separate document.  See, e.g., MillerCoors LLC v. Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC , 940 F.3d 922, 922 (7th Cir. 2019); Auto Driveaway Franchise Systems, LLC v. Auto Driveaway Richmond, LLC , 928 F.3d 670, 676 (7th Cir. 2019) (“We interpret Rule 65(d)(1)(C) to require than an injunction must be embodied in a standalone separate document.”); City of Chicago v. Sessions , 2018 WL 4268814, at *2 (7th Cir. August 10, 2018).  So, do not include an injunction in the body of a proposed order that covers anything else.  Every injunction should stand on its own. An injunction must not “refer[] to the complaint or other document” when “describ[ing] in reasonable detail . . . the act or acts restrained or required.”  Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)(1)(C).  An injunction should not incorporate any other document by reference.  See BankDirect Capital Finance, LLC v. Capital Premium Financing, Inc. , 912 F.3d 1054, 1057 (7th Cir. 2019); DuPuy v. Samuels , 465 F.3d 757, 758 (7th Cir. 2006); MillerCoors , 2019 WL 5280872, at 922 (noting that Rule 65(d)(1)(C) “requires every injunction to be set forth without referring to any other document”). Motions and Memoranda of Law chevron_right print Agreed Motions If a motion is joint, uncontested, or agreed, please so indicate in the title and body of the motion. A party seeking an extension of time must contact all other parties to determine if the motion is opposed.  The party seeking the extension should indicate in the motion (1) the reason for the request; (2) the number of previous extensions; and (3) whether the motion is opposed, and if so, on what grounds. Rulings Counsel may email the Courtroom Deputy, Jessica J. Ramos, at  [email protected] to inquire on the status of a motion.   Citations If counsel cites to an unpublished opinion, the Court strongly prefers citations to Westlaw. Please attach copies of any cited authorities that are not available on Westlaw. Searchable Text All electronically-filed documents should be made word searchable before being filed on ECF.  The Court strongly encourages counsel to convert any word-processed document into a .pdf document by printing or publishing to .pdf, rather than manually scanning a paper copy into .pdf.  The former method of conversion generates searchable optical character recognition (OCR) text; the latter does not. Motions to Strike chevron_right print Motions to strike are strongly disfavored.  See generally Custom Vehicles, Inc. v. Forest River, Inc. , 464 F.3d 725, 727 (7th Cir. 2006) (Easterbrook, J., in chambers).  They serve primarily as unauthorized vehicles for parties to expand the page limits for memoranda in support of their motions.  Motions to strike almost always would require the Court to decide significant issues (and, indeed, the underlying motion) on the merits and would multiply the briefs (because the other side should be allowed to respond).   Id. at 727.   The Court is capable of discerning if a reply brief raises a new argument, or if a litigant has failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 56.1 (governing summary judgment).  Such errors do not require supplemental motion practice.   If a party believes that the other side’s brief contains inaccurate facts or that the other side’s Local Rule 56.1 statement contains an unsupported assertion, then the complaining party should make that argument in the response or reply brief, or in the responsive 56.1 statement.   Motions to strike that are not within the limited boundaries established by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) may be summarily denied. Notice of Filing vs. Notice of Motion chevron_right print A notice of filing isn’t a thing (in federal court, anyway).  Please don’t file one. A notice of motion is  a notice that sets a date and time for a hearing with the Court for a motion.  That’s the old way of doing things in this district.  A notion of motion is no longer necessary.  The Northern District of Illinois suspended the practice of filing a notice of motion a few years ago.   See  General Order 21-0027, as amended.  Under the current rules, parties should simply file the motion, without noticing the motion for a hearing on a specific date.  All of this is a long way of saying a simple point.  You don’t need to file a notice of filing, and you don’t need to file a notice of motion.  Just file your motion. Pretrial Order in Civil Cases chevron_right print STANDING ORDER ON PREPARATION OF FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES BEFORE JUDGE SEEGER     Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the parties in every civil action that is scheduled for trial shall jointly prepare and submit a Final Pretrial Order.   This Standing Order sets the requirements for the Final Pretrial Order.     Plaintiff’s counsel is responsible for preparing the initial draft of the Final Pretrial Order, but all counsel must participate in the process in good faith.   Counsel must cooperate with one another, and must respond to each other in a timely manner.   The Court requires each side to prepare their respective portions ( e.g. , each side will prepare its own exhibit list), and requires plaintiff’s counsel to put it all together and handle the filing.   Preparing the Final Pretrial Order is a big undertaking, and the process requires cooperation and full participation well in advance of the due date.   Counsel may notify the Court as necessary if the other side is not participating fully in the preparation process.       The parties must prepare the Final Pretrial Order as follows.   Plaintiff’s counsel must provide a draft to defendant’s counsel no later than twenty-one days before the due date.   Defendant’s counsel must respond in writing to plaintiff’s draft no later than fourteen days before the Final Pretrial Order is due, including any objections, changes, and additions to plaintiff’s draft, as well as defendant’s portions of the draft Final Pretrial Order ( e.g. , defendant’s witness list, exhibit list, and objections to exhibits and deposition testimony listed by plaintiff). The parties must meet and confer no later than seven days before the due date to discuss their respective drafts and to reach agreement to the extent possible.       The Court expects the process to go smoothly.   Non-compliance with these requirements may subject a party and/or its counsel to sanctions.     The Court encourages counsel to take care when preparing the Final Pretrial Order.   Make it user-friendly.     After the meet-and-confer process, it is the responsibility of plaintiff’s counsel, with full cooperation from defendant’s counsel, to assemble the Final Pretrial Order for filing.   Counsel must submit the Final Pretrial Order to the Court with a cover document setting forth the case caption and the title FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER.   The cover document must state that “This Order will control the course of the trial and may not be amended except by consent of the parties, or by order of the Court to prevent manifest injustice.”   Counsel for each party must sign the document.     Counsel must file the Final Pretrial Order electronically using CM/ECF.   To file it, select the appropriate CM/ECF event, “Other Filings” and then “Other Documents,” and choose the Proposed Pretrial Order event.   Also email it to [email protected] in Microsoft Word format.       The Final Pretrial Order must contain the following information:     1.          Trial Attorneys.   The parties must provide a list of the attorneys trying the case, including business addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers.   Also, they must provide a list of the names of all people who will be sitting at counsel table, including parties, consultants, legal and technical assistants, and anyone else.     2.         Jurisdiction.   The parties must provide a concise statement of the basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction.   In diversity cases or other cases requiring a jurisdictional amount in controversy, the Order shall contain either a stipulation that the required jurisdictional amount is met or a brief written statement citing evidence supporting the claim that such a sum reasonably could be awarded.   If jurisdiction is disputed, please state the nature of and basis for the dispute.     3.         Type and length of trial.   The parties must state whether the trial will be a bench trial or a jury trial, and must provide a realistic estimate of the expected length of the trial, meaning the number of trial days (assume a six-hour day of trial testimony).   A typical trial day before Judge Seeger will begin between 9:30 and 10:00 a.m. and will end no later than 4:45 p.m., with a break of approximately 60 to 75 minutes for lunch.   Jury trials typically will begin on Mondays.   Jury selection will begin at 9:00 a.m.       4.          Claims for Trial.   The parties must identify all remaining claims (by count) and counterclaims.   Confirm which claims are pending against which defendants.   Provide a citation to the operative pleading ( e.g. , the second amended complaint), with the docket number.   See Second. Am. Cplt. (Dckt. No. 100).   Many complaints include lots of claims against several defendants, and it is common for some of the claims to fall by the wayside before trial.   The final pretrial order must make it easy to confirm what’s left for trial.       5.         Relief Sought.   The parties must provide an itemization of damages and other relief sought.   In personal injury and employment discrimination cases, it may be useful to consult Local Rule 16.1.2 and Local Rule 16.1.3, respectively, when itemizing damages estimates.     6.         Case Statement.   The parties must provide a concise statement (one or two paragraphs) of the claim(s) of the plaintiff(s), defense(s) of the defendant(s), and all counterclaims or cross-claims.   In a jury trial, this statement will be read to the jury during voir dire.   The statement must be non-argumentative.   The goal is to provide the jury with a short, neutral overview of the case in plain English.   It will help bring the jury up to speed and alert them to any possible issues with sitting on the jury.        7.         Voir Dire Questions.   To the extent possible, the Court prefers that most questions asked of potential jurors be included in a written questionnaire (of no more than two pages) as it encourages reflection and candor.  To propose questions that should be included in the written questionnaire distributed to the venire, as well as questions the Court should ask orally, the parties must file a joint document that includes:  (1) joint questions in the form of a questionnaire; (2) a list of questions to be asked orally; and (3) proposed questions to which one party objects, and a short basis for the objection.  Each side is limited to 12 proposed disputed questions, absent leave of Court before the final pretrial conference.     8.         Witnesses.   The parties must provide separate lists (per side) of the names of all witnesses:   (a) who will be called; (b) who may be called; and (c) whose testimony will be presented by deposition designation or other prior testimony (indicate whether the presentation will be by reading the testimony, or by video).   In a jury trial, the names on the list will be read to the jury during voir dire.   Any witness not listed in the Final Pretrial Order will be precluded from testifying absent a showing of good cause, except that each party reserves the right to call such rebuttal witnesses (who are not presently identifiable) as may be necessary.   For each witness, provide a short description (two or three sentences, tops) of the witness and his or her role in the case.   For example:   “George Washington was in the carriage with Plaintiff Alexander Hamilton.   Washington heard the libelous comments made by Defendant Aaron Burr.” a.         Objections.   Each party must provide a statement of any objections to the calling of any witnesses, including expert witnesses.   Objections not made in the Final Pretrial Order will be deemed waived absent a showing of good cause.   If the objection is the subject of a motion in limine, the Pretrial Order may simply refer to the motion (with the docket number) and need not repeat the grounds stated in the motion. b.         Depositions.   For each witness whose deposition will be used at trial, provide a chart with the following information:   (a) a list, by page and line, of the testimony that each side seeks to present; (b) a concise statement of objections to any testimony and the basis for the objection; and (c) a concise statement of the asserted basis of admissibility.   Objections not made in the Final Pretrial Order will be deemed waived absent a showing of good cause.   If there are objections, a copy of the deposition (preferably in small-type format) must be provided with the Final Pretrial Order (in a separate docket entry).   The opposing party must include counter-designations (if any) in the Final Pretrial Order, too.   Before trial, the Court may require a joint chart the identifies all of the deposition designations and counter-designations, by witness, for clarity and ease of reference.   c.         Experts.   The parties must provide stipulations or statements setting forth the qualifications of each expert witness in such form that the statement can be read to the jury at the time the expert witness takes the stand.   The parties must identify the subject matter of each expert’s testimony.   Only one expert will be permitted to testify on each subject for each party absent good cause.   Any motions about expert qualifications, methodologies, and related matters within Rule 702, Rule 703, and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals , 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and its progeny, must be filed at least sixty days before trial.     9.         Exhibits.   The parties must provide an exhibit list that includes all exhibits that the parties may introduce into evidence at trial.   The exhibit list must include (1) the trial exhibit number; (2) the date of the document; (3) a brief description of each exhibit; (4) whether there is an objection, and if so, a concise statement of the basis of the objection ( e.g., Rule 402 – relevance; Rule 403 – undue prejudice); and (5) a concise statement of the asserted basis of admissibility, if there is an objection.       The chart should be easy to read, using a format that is substantially similar to the following: No. Date Description Objection Basis 1 6/7/18 Agreement     2 9/11/19 Mortgage     3 9/16/19 Police Report Hearsay Rule 801(d)(2) – Opposing Party’s Statement       Any exhibit that is not listed in the Final Pretrial Order will not come into evidence absent a showing of good cause.   Avoid cumulative documents.   Duplicate exhibits shall not be listed by different parties, but may be offered as joint exhibits (for example, in a breach-of-contract case, the contract presumably should be a joint exhibit).   The parties should agree upon joint exhibits as soon as possible, so that counsel will have time to prepare their respective exhibit lists.   All parties shall stipulate to the authenticity of exhibits whenever possible.   The parties must identify any exhibits where authenticity remains in dispute and the specific reasons for any party’s refusal to stipulate. a.         Numbering.   The parties must use the exhibit-naming convention for the Jury Evidence Recording System (JERS). b.         Exhibits with no objection.   Exhibits for which there is no objection will be received in evidence whe