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 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Cheryl Lucille Gaffner

Plaintiffs,

v.

Stratton Restoration LLC

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV-15-02166-PHX-JAT

ORDER SETTING RULE 16

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

 

IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

a Scheduling Conference is set for Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 10:30 a.m., Courtroom

503, Fifth Floor, Sandra Day O’Connor U.S. Federal Courthouse, 401 W. Washington St.,

Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2151. 

* * * N O T I C E * * *

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT COUNSEL WHO WILL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR TRIAL OF THE LAWSUIT FOR EACH PARTY SHALL

APPEAR AND PARTICIPATE IN THE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Counsel for all parties are directed to Rule 16 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the objectives of the conference.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that at least one of the attorneys for each party

attending the conference shall have authority to enter into stipulations and make admissions

regarding all matters which may be discussed.

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 10 Filed 03/14/16 Page 1 of 5
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

1

 If the basis of jurisdiction is diversity, the jurisdictional basis shall include a

statement of the citizenship of every party, including entities. The parties are reminded that

a corporation is a citizen of the state where it is incorporated and the state that is its principal

place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1); Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 80, 92-93

(2010). The parties are further reminded that a LLC, like a partnership, is a citizen of every

state in which one of its members (or partners) resides. See Belleville Catering Co. v.

Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 692 (7th Cir. 2003).

2

 Plaintiff shall also move under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 for default

against any party who has been timely served and has not timely answered.

- 2 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that at the time of the Scheduling Conference, counsel

must be prepared to discuss logistical matters and what the parties must prove to prevail on

their respective claims or defenses.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all parties are directed to meet at least twenty-one

(21) days before the Scheduling Conference, in accordance with Rule 26(f) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure to discuss the following matters and shall develop a Joint Proposed

Case Management Plan which shall include brief statements or proposals concerning:

1. The nature of the case, setting forth in brief statements the factual and legal

basis of plaintiff’s claims and defendant’s defenses;

2. The jurisdictional basis of the case, citing specific statutes;1

3. The parties, if any, which have not been served, as well as any parties which

have not filed an answer or other appearance. Unless counsel can otherwise show cause, a

proposed form of order shall accompany the Joint Proposed Case Management Plan that

dismisses any party which has not been served, including fictitious and unnamed parties;2

4. The names of parties not subject to the Court’s jurisdiction;

5. Whether the case is suitable for reference to arbitration, to a special master, or

to a United States Magistrate Judge for trial, and, if so, whether the parties consent to trial

before a Magistrate Judge;

6. The status of related cases pending before other judges of this Court or before

other courts;

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 10 Filed 03/14/16 Page 2 of 5
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

3

 In preparing the Joint Proposed Case Management Plan, the parties shall suggest

their proposed deadlines keeping in mind that the Court will not entertain discovery disputes

after the close of discovery barring extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, the proposed

deadlines shall give sufficient time to complete discovery by the deadline (complete being

defined as including the time to propound discovery, the time to answer all propounded

discovery, the time for the Court to resolve all discovery disputes, and the time to complete

any final discovery necessitated by the Court’s ruling on any discovery disputes).

- 3 -

7. Suggested changes, if necessary, in the timing, form, or requirement for

disclosures under Rule 26(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including a statement of

when Initial Disclosures were made or will be made. Initial disclosures shall be in

compliance with Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Unless otherwise

stipulated to in writing by the parties or directed by a written order of this Court, Initial

Disclosures shall be made at the initial Rule 26(f) Case Management Meeting or within ten

(10) days after the meeting. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that to satisfy the requirements

of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a), the parties shall file with the Clerk of the Court a

Notice of Initial Disclosure; copies of the actual disclosures shall not be filed.

8. Proposed deadlines for:

a. filing a motion to amend the pleadings;

b. disclosure of expert testimony under Rule 26(a)(2)(C) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure;

c. discovery;3

 and

d. filing dispositive motions

e. Case specific deadlines: If either party is presenting their case as a class

action, the parties shall include a deadline for motions for class

certification; if any defendant anticipates raising the defense of

qualified immunity, the parties shall include a date by which all

motions for dismissal or summary judgment based on qualified

immunity will be filed; if either party believes a Markman hearing will

be necessary, the parties shall include a date for holding the Markman

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 10 Filed 03/14/16 Page 3 of 5
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

- 4 -

hearing.

9. Suggested changes, if any, in the limitations on discovery imposed by the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and/or Civil Local Rule 16.2 of the Rules of Practice for

the United States District Court for the District of Arizona;

10. The estimated date that the case will be ready for trial, the estimated length of

trial, and any suggestions for shortening the trial;

11. Whether a jury trial has been requested and whether the request for a jury trial

is contested. If the request for a jury trial is contested, the Joint Proposed Case Management

Plan shall set forth the reasons why a trial by jury is in dispute;

12. The prospects for settlement, including (a) any request to have a settlement

conference before another United States District Court Judge or a Magistrate Judge, or

(b) other request of the Court for assistance in settlement efforts; and

13. Modification of pretrial procedures due to the simplicity or complexity of the

case, and any other matters which counsel believes will aid the Court in resolving this dispute

in a just, speedy, and inexpensive manner.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall jointly file their Proposed Case

Management Plan with the Clerk of the Court not less than ten (10) days before the

Scheduling Conference. Absent extraordinary circumstances, no extensions of time will be

granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that it is the responsibility of Plaintiff(s) to

expeditiously initiate the communications necessary to prepare the Joint Proposed Case

Management Plan. Once contacted by Plaintiff(s), Defendant(s) shall act in an expeditious

manner to effectuate the preparation of the Plan.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for all parties are expected to comply

with Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and minimize the expense of discovery.

The Court, after consultation with counsel and the parties, will enter a Rule 16

Scheduling Order concerning, inter alia, discovery and dispositive motions. To the extent

that the Court’s Rule 16 Scheduling Order differs from the parties’ Proposed Case

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 10 Filed 03/14/16 Page 4 of 5
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

- 5 -

Management Plan, the provisions in the Court’s Order shall supersede the parties’ Proposed

Case Management Plan and shall control the course of this action unless modified by

subsequent Order of this Court. The parties and their counsel are all cautioned that the

deadlines set forth in the Rule 16 Scheduling Order shall be strictly enforced.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel review the requirements of Civil Local

Rule 7.1 and Civil Local Rule 7.2, Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for

the District of Arizona, with their administrative/support personnel to ensure that all

pleadings are in compliance with the Rules.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court views the Scheduling Conference as

critical to its case management responsibilities and the parties’ responsibilities under Rule

1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to send copies

of this Order to all counsel of record and to all parties, if any, appearing in propria persona.

DATED this 14th day of March, 2016.

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 10 Filed 03/14/16 Page 5 of 5