(a) Convening Scheduling Conferences; Transferred Actions: Except in actions
exempted by paragraph (g) of this Rule or by standing order, a judicial officer may,
unless the Court determines otherwise, convene a scheduling conference as soon as
practicable.
A judicial officer may establish the date, time and place of the scheduling
conference. As soon as practicable, but in no event later than seven (7) days after the
appearance of a defendant, the Court shall enter an order which shall be served on all
counsel then of record and mailed to each then unrepresented party for whom an
address is available from the record. The order shall also establish the date by which a
meeting of the parties must be held pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and paragraph (b)
of this Rule, and the date by which a written report on the meeting of the parties must be
filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and paragraph (c) of this Rule.
In a case removed or transferred to this Court, a judicial officer shall convene a
scheduling conference as soon as practicable, but in no event later than sixty (60) days
after removal or transfer. The Court shall enter an order which shall be served on all
counsel then of record and to each then unrepresented party for whom an address is
available from the record no later than seven (7) days after the case is removed or
transferred.
(b) Obligation of the Parties to Meet: As soon as practicable, and in any event
at least twenty-one (21) days before the date set for the scheduling conference, the
parties shall meet in person or by telephone to discuss and report on all Fed. R. Civ. P.
16 and 26(f) matters, and:
(1) consider, consistent with paragraph (d) of this Rule, whether the case
is complex and appropriate for monitoring in an individualized and
case-specific manner through one or more case management conferences
and, if applicable, to propose for the Court’s consideration three alternative
dates and times for the first conference;
(2) agree, if possible, upon the disputed facts that have been alleged with
particularity in the pleadings;
(3) consider consenting to trial by a magistrate judge;
(4) consider alternative dispute resolution processes;
(5) confer and attempt to agree on discovery of ESI pursuant to LR Civ P
26.06; and
(6) prepare an agenda of matters to be discussed at the scheduling
conference.
Counsel and all unrepresented parties who have appeared in the case are jointly
responsible for arranging and being present or represented at the meeting, agreeing on
matters to be considered at the scheduling conference and considering a prompt
settlement or resolution of the case.
(c) Written Report of Meeting; Canceled Scheduling Conference: Counsel and
all unrepresented parties who were present or represented at the meeting are jointly
responsible for filing a written report on their meeting no later than fourteen (14) days
after the meeting.
Any matters on which the parties differ shall be set forth separately and explained
in the parties’ meeting report. The parties’ proposed pretrial schedule and plan of
discovery and disclosures shall advise the Court of their best estimates of the time
needed to accomplish specified pretrial steps. The parties’ meeting report shall be
considered by the judicial officer as advisory only.
If, after the date fixed for filing the written report, the judicial officer determines
that the scheduling conference is not necessary, it may be canceled and the scheduling
order may be entered.
(d) Conducting Scheduling Conferences: Except in a case in which a
scheduling conference has not been scheduled pursuant to order by a judicial officer or
has been canceled pursuant to paragraph (c) of this Rule, a judicial officer may
convene a scheduling meeting by telephone or by video conference, within the
mandatory time frame specified in paragraph (a) of this Rule, regardless of whether the
parties have met pursuant to paragraph (b) of this Rule or filed a written report pursuant
to paragraph (c) of this Rule. At the scheduling meeting , the Court shall consider any
written report filed by the parties and discuss time limits and other matters counsel were
obligated to consider in their meeting and that may be addressed in the scheduling
order.
At or following the scheduling conference, if one is held, or as soon as practicable
after the date fixed for filing the written report if the scheduling conference is canceled,
the judicial officer shall determine whether the case is complex or otherwise appropriate
for careful and deliberate monitoring in an individualized and case-specific manner.
The judicial officer shall consider assigning in the scheduling order any case so
categorized to a case management conference or series of conferences under LR Civ P
16.02. If the case is so assigned, the scheduling order, notwithstanding paragraph (e)
of this Rule, may be limited to establishing time limits and addressing other matters that
must be resolved before the first case management conference. The factors to be
considered by the judicial officer in determining whether the case is complex include:
(1) the complexity of the issues, the number of parties, the difficulty of the
legal questions and the uniqueness of proof problems;
(2) the amount of time reasonably needed by the parties and their
attorneys to prepare the case for trial;
(3) the judicial and other resources required and available for the
preparation and disposition of the case;
(4) whether the case belongs to those categories of cases that:
(i) involve little or no discovery,
(ii) ordinarily require little or no additional judicial intervention, or
(iii) generally fall into identifiable and easily managed
patterns;
(5) the extent to which individualized, case-specific treatment will promote
the goal of reducing cost and delay; and
(6) whether the public interest requires that the case receive more intense
judicial attention.
(e) Scheduling Orders: Following the scheduling conference, if one is held, or
as soon as practicable after the date fixed for filing the written report if the scheduling
conference is canceled, but in any event within sixty (60) days after the appearance of a
defendant or within ninety (90) days after the complaint has been served on a
defendant, whichever is earlier, the judicial officer shall enter a scheduling order
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b). The order shall advise the parties that the term
“complete discovery,” as that term is used in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b), means that all
discovery, objections, motions to compel and all other motions and replies relating to
discovery must be filed in time for the parties objecting or responding to have the
opportunity under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to make responses. Unless
otherwise ordered, the term “all discovery” as used in the preceding definition of
“complete discovery” includes the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) and
(2), but not the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3).
(f) Modification of Scheduling Order:
(1) Time limits in the scheduling order, including limits
concerning the joinder of other parties, amendment of pleadings, filing of
motions and completion of discovery, and dates concerning pretrial
conferences and trial, may be modified for cause by order. A party or
parties requesting a continuance must first meet and confer with all of the
other parties in an attempt to reach an agreement as to three (3) possible
non-consecutive dates to which to move the deadline or hearing. If an
agreement is reached, the moving party must specify these three (3)
possible non-consecutive dates within the motion to continue. If the
parties cannot reach an agreement, then each party must advise the Court
of their suggested dates.
(2) Subject to subparagraph (3), stipulations to modify disclosure or
discovery procedures or limitations will be valid and enforced if they are in
writing, signed by the stipulating parties or their counsel, filed promptly and
do not affect the trial date or other dates and deadlines specified in
subparagraph (1).
(g) Categories of Actions Exempted: In addition to those actions and
proceedings identified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 81 to which the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
do not apply, the following categories of actions are exempted from the requirements of
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b), 26(a)(1)–(4), 26(f) and the Local Rules of Civil Procedure relating
thereto unless otherwise ordered:
(1) habeas corpus cases and motions attacking a federal sentence;
(2) procedures and hearings involving recalcitrant witnesses before federal
courts or grand juries pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1826;
(3) actions for injunctive relief;
(4) review of administrative rulings;
(5) Social Security cases;
(6) prisoner petitions pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), in which the
plaintiff is unrepresented by counsel;
(7) condemnation actions;
(8) bankruptcy proceedings appealed to this Court;
(9) collection and forfeiture cases in which the United States is the plaintiff and
the defendant is unrepresented by counsel;
(10) Freedom of Information Act proceedings;
(11) post-judgment enforcement proceedings and debtor examinations;
(12) enforcement or vacation of arbitration awards;
(13) civil forfeiture actions;
(14) student loan collection cases;
(15) actions that present purely legal issues, require no resolution of factual
issues and that may be submitted on the pleadings, motions and memoranda of
law;
(16) certain cases involving the assertion of a right under the Constitution of the
United States or a federal statute, if good cause for exemption is shown; and
(17) such other categories of actions as may be exempted by standing order.
