Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02820/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02820-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Paul Lewis
Plaintiff
United Parcel Service, Inc.
Defendant

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

,

PAUL LEWIS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., an Ohio

Corporation, and DOES 1–100, inclusive,

Defendants. /

No. C 05-02820 WHA

REMINDER NOTICE OF

UPCOMING TRIAL AND FINAL

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

This notice serves as a friendly reminder that this case remains set for a FINAL

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE on NOVEMBER 21, 2005, at 2:00 P.M., with a JURY TRIAL on

DECEMBER 5, 2005. Please consult the existing case management order and review and follow

all standing guidelines and orders of the undersigned for civil cases on the Court’s website at

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov. Continuances will rarely be granted. 

The final pretrial conference will be an important event, for it will be there that the

shape of the upcoming trial will be determined, including in limine orders, time limits and

exhibit mechanics. Lead trial counsel must attend. 

To avoid any misunderstanding with respect to the final pretrial conference and trial, the

Court wishes to emphasize that all filings and appearances must be made — on pain of

dismissal, default or other sanction — unless and until a dismissal fully resolving the case is

received. It will not be enough to inform the clerk that a settlement in principle has been
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

reached or to lodge a partially executed settlement agreement or to lodge a fully executed

agreement (or dismissal) that resolves less than the entire case. Where, however, a

fully-executed and unconditional settlement agreement clearly and fully disposing of the entire

case is lodged reasonably in advance of the pretrial conference or trial and only a ministerial act

remains, the Court will arrange a telephone conference to work out an alternate procedure

pending a formal dismissal. 

In order to evaluate whether the Court can be of further ADR assistance, please file a

joint report within fourteen days of service of this order describing the progress and status of

your ADR efforts to date and any further ADR recommendations by the parties. 

In this case, the Court wishes to consider the following additional trial procedures and

desires that counsel meet and confer and reach a stipulation concerning whether and how to use

them: 

1. Scheduling opposing experts so as to appear in successive order; 

2. Giving preliminary instructions on the law; 

3. Allowing limited pre-closing deliberations (as per, e.g., Rule 39 of

the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure); and 

4. Allowing each side fifteen minutes of opening/argument time to be

used during the evidence time (in addition to normal opening statement and

closing argument). 

Please present the results of your stipulation (or not) in the joint pretrial conference

submissions.

Dated: August 16, 2005. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE