Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00307/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00307-15/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dennis Burton
Plaintiff
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC
Defendant

Document Text:

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Because this case has been scheduled only through class related activities—and these have now 

been completed—the Court ORDERS:

1. The Court sets a further scheduling conference on December 17, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. 

Telephonic appearances via the CourtCall service are authorized;

2. No later than December 10, 2014, counsel SHALL file a joint further scheduling 

conference report which SHALL include a discussion of the following issues:

a. Any proposed amendment to the pleadings presently on file;

b. A proposed deadline for amendments to pleadings;

c. Whether additional discovery is needed as to Plaintiff’s individual claims and, if so, a

proposed deadline to complete this discovery;

d. Whether either party anticipates using the services of an expert as to Plaintiff’s 

individual claims and, if so, deadlines by which experts must be disclosed and discovery 

DENNIS BURTON et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:13-CV-00307 LJO JLT

ORDER SETTING FURTHER SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE

Case 1:13-cv-00307-LJO-JLT Document 88 Filed 11/06/14 Page 1 of 3
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

completed as to experts;

e. The deadline by which non-dispostive and dispositive motions will be filed related to 

Plaintiff’s individual claims. Dispositive motions must be filed at least seven weeks before the 

pretrial conference and non-dispositive motions must be filed at least six weeks before the 

dispositive motions unless the parties determine that the dispositive motion would not be 

impacted by any ruling on the nondispositive motions;

f. An estimate of the number of trial days required;

g. The proposed trial date that should be at least 24 weeks after the close of discovery, if 

any;

h. The proposed pretrial conference date which should be at least eight weeks before the 

trial date;

i. Because the District Judges’ dockets are extremely crowded, the parties should consider 

and address the issue of whether they are willing to consent to the jurisdiction of a U.S. 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(c). 

j. Whether either party requests bifurcation or phasing of trial, or any other suggestion for 

shortening or expediting discovery, pre−trial motions or trial.

k. Whether this matter is related to any matter pending in this court or any other court, 

including any bankruptcy court.

l. Joint Scheduling Reports are to be emailed, in Word format, to 

JLTorders@caed.uscourts.gov.

m. Any other matters counsel wish to bring to the Court’s attention.

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 1:13-cv-00307-LJO-JLT Document 88 Filed 11/06/14 Page 2 of 3
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

SHOULD COUNSEL OR A PARTY APPEARING PRO SE FAIL TO APPEAR AT THE 

FURTHER MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, OR FAIL TO COMPLY WITH 

THE DIRECTIONS AS SET FORTH ABOVE, AN EX PARTE HEARING MAY BE HELD 

AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL, DEFAULT, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE JUDGMENT 

MAY BE ENTERED, INCLUDING SANCTIONS AND CONTEMPT OF COURT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 6, 2014 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00307-LJO-JLT Document 88 Filed 11/06/14 Page 3 of 3