UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-cv-80469- MARRA/MATTHEWMAN

NELSON FERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE WALKING COMPANY, a foreign

For profit corporation,

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY PROCEDURE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court pursuant to an Order referring all discovery and 

discovery-related motions to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge [DE 13] entered by 

United States District Judge Kenneth Marra. To ensure an expeditious and just discovery 

process, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. Pre-hearing Communication: If a discovery dispute arises, the parties must confer 

either in person or via telephone to resolve their discovery disputes before seeking court 

intervention. Email correspondence alone does not constitute a sufficient conferral. 

During the course of this conversation, counsel shall discuss the available options for 

resolving the dispute without court intervention and make a concerted, good faith effort 

to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution. 

The Court directs all parties and their counsel to read Chief Justice John Roberts’ 2015 

Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, in which he discusses the importance of the

December 1, 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Chief 

Justice John Roberts, 2015 Year–End Report on the Federal Judiciary,

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2015year-endreport.pdf. Pursuant to 

the Rules, all parties and their counsel are required to size and shape their discovery 

requests to the requisites of a case. “Specifically, the pretrial process must provide 

parties with efficient access to what is needed to prove a claim or defense, but eliminate 

unnecessary or wasteful discovery.” Id. at p. 7; see e.g. O’Boyle v. Sweetapple, Case No. 

14-81250-CIV-Marra/Matthewman, 2016 WL 492655, n. 2 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 8, 2016). 

This also means that parties and their counsel are required to confer in good faith before 

filing any discovery motion in an honest effort to resolve discovery disputes and ensure 

the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action or proceeding. As stated 

by Chief Justice Roberts:

KJZ Jun 16, 2020 West Palm Beach

Case 9:20-cv-80469-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/16/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

I cannot believe that many members of the bar went to law school because 

of a burning desire to spend their professional life wearing down 

opponents with creatively burdensome discovery requests or evading 

legitimate requests through dilatory tactics. The test for plaintiffs’ and 

defendants’ counsel alike is whether they will affirmatively search out 

cooperative solutions, chart a cost-effective course of litigation, and 

assume shared responsibility with opposing counsel to achieve just results.

Year-End Report at p. 11.

2. Discovery Motions: If the parties are unable to resolve their discovery disputes 

without court intervention, the movant shall file a discovery motion. All discovery 

motions shall be no longer than five (5) pages. The purpose of the motion is merely to 

frame the discovery issues and succinctly explain the dispute. The moving party MUST 

attach as exhibits any materials relevant to the discovery dispute (e.g., discovery demands 

and discovery responses). 

The opposing party must file a response to the motion, no longer than five (5) pages, 

within five (5) business days of service of the discovery motion. The moving party shall 

have three (3) business days from the date of service of the response to file a reply if it 

chooses to do so. The reply shall be no longer than five (5) pages. 

If the Court determines that a discovery hearing on the motion is necessary, the Court 

will then enter an order setting the matter down for a hearing.

3. Pre-Hearing Discussions: The parties are encouraged to continue to pursue settlement 

of any disputed discovery matters even after the hearing is scheduled. If those efforts are 

successful, counsel should contact Judge Matthewman’s chambers as soon as practicable 

so that the hearing can be timely canceled. Alternatively, if the parties resolve some, but 

not all, of their issues before the hearing, counsel shall timely contact chambers to relay 

which issues are no longer in dispute. 

To the extent that this Order conflicts with the procedures set forth in the Local Rules for the

Southern District of Florida, this Order takes precedence. The Court expects all parties to act 

courteously and professionally in the resolution of their discovery dispute. The Court may 

impose appropriate sanctions upon a finding of failure to comply with this Order or other 

discovery misconduct.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers this 16th day of June, 2020, at West Palm Beach, 

Palm Beach County in the Southern District of Florida.

WILLIAM MATTHEWMAN 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 9:20-cv-80469-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/16/2020 Page 2 of 2