UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
____________ DIVISION
________________, DISCOVERY MANAGEMENT ORDER
Plaintiff[s],
Case No. ________________
v.
District Judge ________________
________________,
Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg
Defendant[s].
To secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this action, and in
accordance with Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court issues the following
discovery management order:
Status Reports
1. No later than twenty-eight days before the close of fact discovery, the parties shall
meet and confer and file a joint status report regarding any remaining fact discovery and stating
whether the parties anticipate completing fact discovery within the deadline set by the scheduling
order.
2. No later than twenty-eight days before the close of expert discovery, the parties
shall meet and confer and file a joint status report regarding any remaining expert discovery and
stating whether the parties anticipate completing expert discovery within the deadline set by the
scheduling order.
1
Extensions of Discovery Deadlines
3. Any motion for extension of a discovery deadline should be filed well in advance
of the deadline.
4. In ruling on motions for extensions of discovery deadlines, the court will consider
whether the requested extensions will likely result in a trial more than three years after the case
was filed. Extensions which would prolong the case beyond three years from filing are unlikely
to be granted.
Short Form Discovery Motions
5. The parties are expected to comply with Rule 37-1 of the Local Rules of Civil
Practice, including but not limited to:
a) the requirement to make reasonable efforts to resolve a discovery dispute
through meeting and conferring before seeking court assistance, see DUCivR
37-1(a);
b) the requirement that short form discovery motions must be filed no later than
45 days after the prompt written communication in section 37-1(a)(2) was sent
to opposing counsel, unless the court grants an extension of time for good
cause, see DUCivR 37-1(b)(2)(C); and
c) the requirement to include as exhibits to the motion a copy of the disputed
discovery request and any response, see DUCivR 37-1(b)(2)(B).
Failure to meet these requirements may result in automatic denial of the motion.
6. In addition to these requirements, Judge Oberg requires short form discovery
motions to identify with specificity the nature of the discovery dispute and to include substantive
argument regarding each discovery request or response at issue.
2
7. If a party believes overlength briefing is necessary, the party may file an
overlength motion or response under Rule 37-1, and include in the overlength motion or
response a request for overlength briefing. (This procedure supersedes the general requirement
of Rule 7-1(a)(6)(A) to file a separate motion for overlength briefing before filing an overlength
motion.) Judge Oberg will generally grant reasonable requests for overlength briefing and allow
equivalent briefing for the other party(ies).
Electronically Stored Information (ESI)
8. In any case likely to involve discovery of a significant amount of electronically
stored information (ESI), the parties should meet and confer regarding ESI protocols. To guide
their discussion, the parties may refer to the ESI checklist available on Judge Oberg’s Practices
and Procedures page on the court website, https://www.utd.uscourts.gov/magistrate-judge-
daphne-oberg.
DATED this ___ day of __________, 202_.
BY THE COURT:
______________________________
Daphne A. Oberg
United States Magistrate Judge
3
