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, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Stratton Restoration LLC, 

Defendant. 

NO. CV-15-02166-PHX-JAT

RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER 

 On August 24, 2016, a Scheduling Conference was held in open Court pursuant to 

Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Prior to the conference, the parties 

filed a joint Rule 26(f) Proposed Case Management Plan. Pursuant to the terms of the 

Plan and the representations made by the parties at the Scheduling Conference, all parties 

were ordered to comply with the deadlines established in this Order. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the current provisions of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure shall apply to all proceedings concerning this case. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all Initial Disclosures as defined in Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a), if not already exchanged prior to the time of the 

Scheduling Conference, shall be made no later than ten (10) days after the entry of this 

Order. 

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 rather than copies of the actual disclosures. 

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 24 Filed 08/30/16 Page 1 of 7
- 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 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any motion to amend the Complaint shall be 

filed no later than October 7, 2016. If no amended complaint is filed, any motion to 

amend the Answer shall be filed no later than October 21, 2016. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the party with the burden of proof on an issue 

shall make all expert disclosures required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure no later 

than January 27, 2017. The responding party (not having the burden of proof on the 

issue) shall make all expert disclosures required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

no later than February 27, 2017.1

 The party with the burden of proof on the issue shall 

make its rebuttal expert disclosure, if any, no later than March 24, 2017. No deposition 

of any expert witnesses shall occur before the disclosures concerning expert witnesses 

mandated by this Order are made. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all discovery, including depositions of parties, 

witnesses, and experts, answers to interrogatories, and supplements to interrogatories 

must be completed by April 28, 2017. In no event, however, shall this provision alter the 

duties and obligations imposed upon the parties by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e). 

This Order contemplates that each party will conduct discovery in an expeditious manner 

so as to complete, within the deadline, any and all discovery.

2

 Further, in responding 

to Requests for Admissions, Requests for Production, or Interrogatories, the parties are 

cautioned that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit “general” or “global” 

 

1

 If no expert disclosure is made by a party who has the burden of proof on an issue by the initial expert disclosure deadline, all initial expert disclosures by the party who does not have the burden of proof on an issue shall be made no later than the 

responding party deadline. A party responding to this type of disclosure shall do so by the rebuttal disclosure deadline. 

2

 As set forth in the Order Setting Rule 16 Scheduling Conference, the Court will 

not entertain discovery disputes after the close of discovery barring extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, the parties shall complete all discovery by the deadline set forth in this Order (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). Thus, “last minute” or “eleventh hour” 

discovery which results in insufficient time to undertake additional discovery and which requires an extension of the discovery deadline will be met with disfavor, and may result in denial of an extension, exclusion of evidence, or the imposition of other sanctions. 

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 24 Filed 08/30/16 Page 2 of 7
- 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 

objections. Accordingly, the Court will not consider nor rule on objections that are not 

specific to the individual request propounded. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notwithstanding any provisions of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure or any other provisions of this Order, non-party witnesses shall 

not be permitted to attend, either physically, electronically, or otherwise, the deposition 

of any other witness in this case without an Order of this Court to the contrary. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED reminding counsel of their duty under Rule 26(e) 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to supplement all Rule 26(a) disclosures and 

responses to discovery requests. Pursuant to Rule 26(e)(1), any additions or other 

changes to information previously disclosed must be made prior to the time that Rule 

26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures are due. The Court effectively requires all Rule 26(a)(3) 

Pretrial Disclosures to be contained in the Joint Proposed Final Pretrial Order. Therefore 

all exhibits and witnesses that may be offered at trial must be disclosed before the 

discovery deadline and sufficiently in advance of the deadline that meaningful discovery 

necessitated by such disclosures can reasonably be completed before the discovery 

deadline. This Order therefore supersedes the “thirty-day before trial” disclosure 

deadline contained in that Rule. Therefore (1) failure to have timely supplemented a 

Rule 26(a) disclosure, including but not limited to witnesses and exhibits, (2) failure to 

have timely supplemented responses to any valid discovery requests, or (3) attempting to 

include any witnesses or exhibits in the joint Proposed Final Pretrial Order that were not 

previously disclosed in a timely manner so as to allow for meaningful discovery prior to 

the discovery deadline set forth in this Order, may result in the exclusion of such 

evidence at trial or the imposition of other sanctions. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that discovery motions are prohibited. In the 

event of a discovery dispute, the parties shall jointly contact the Court via conference call 

to request a telephonic conference. The parties shall not contact the Court regarding a 

discovery dispute unless they have been unable to resolve the dispute themselves after 

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 24 Filed 08/30/16 Page 3 of 7
- 4 - 

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 

personal consultation3 and sincere efforts to do so, and they are prepared to state to the 

court that they agree what is in dispute. The parties shall not file any written materials 

related to a discovery dispute without express leave of Court. If the Court does order 

written submissions, the movant shall include a statement certifying that counsel could 

not satisfactorily resolve the matter after personal consultation and sincere efforts to do 

so in accordance with Civil Local Rule 7.2(j). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all dispositive motions shall be filed no later 

than May 19, 2017. Such motions must be, in all respects, in full compliance with the 

Civil Local Rules. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each party shall file no more than one 

motion for summary judgment unless leave of Court is obtained. To obtain leave of 

Court, a party shall file a motion setting forth the reasons justifying the filing of more 

than one summary judgment motion and/or the reasons the party seeks leave to exceed 

the page limits set forth in Civil Local Rule 7.2(e). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all parties are hereby specifically admonished 

that failure to respond to a motion by serving and filing an answering memorandum 

within the time period expressly provided for in Civil Local Rule 7.2(c), 56.1(b) and/or 

12.1(b) may be deemed a consent to the denial or granting of the motion and the Court 

may dispose of the motion summarily pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.2(i). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, the parties shall not notice oral argument on 

any motion. Instead, a party desiring oral argument on a motion shall request argument 

by placing “Oral Argument Requested” immediately below the title of such motion. 

The Court will then issue a minute entry order scheduling the oral argument if it deems 

one necessary. 

 Oral argument shall be scheduled at the request of a party on all motions to 

dismiss and motions for summary judgment. On all other motions on which a party 

 

3

 If represented by counsel, lead counsel must be on the conference call and have 

participated in the personal consultation. 

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 24 Filed 08/30/16 Page 4 of 7
- 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 

requests oral argument as set forth above, the Court will determine whether oral argument 

is necessary. The parties are reminded that obtaining oral argument is purely 

administrative. Accordingly, regardless of a scheduled oral argument, the Court may, at 

any time, determine that oral argument is unwarranted and rule on the motion without 

oral argument. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any and all motions, requests, or stipulations 

for extensions of time shall be made in accordance with the provisions of Civil Local 

Rule 7.3. Notwithstanding this directive, however, if such motion, request, or stipulation 

seeks an extension of time in which to file a memorandum in response or in reply to a 

motion previously noticed for oral argument, under no circumstances shall such motion, 

request, or stipulation seek an extension that would preclude the Court from having at 

least thirty (30) days from the due date for the filing of the reply memorandum to 

consider the merits of the underlying motion unless the motion, request, or stipulation 

also seeks to vacate and reschedule the oral argument. Any motion, request, or 

stipulation that seeks both an extension of time and the rescheduling of oral argument 

shall contain a memorandum of points and authorities that demonstrates good cause for 

the Court to grant the requested extension. The deadlines set forth in this Order are the 

deadlines by which a party must file documents with the Court, in addition to serving 

opposing counsel, notwithstanding Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(d). 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if no dispositive motions are pending before 

the Court after the dispositive motion deadline has passed, Plaintiff(s) shall file and 

serve a Notice of Readiness for Final Pretrial Conference within ten (10) days of the 

dispositive motion deadline. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if dispositive motions are pending before the 

Court following the dispositive motions deadline, Plaintiff(s) shall file and serve a 

Notice of Readiness for Final Pretrial Conference within ten (10) days of the 

resolution of the last dispositive motion.

4

 

4

 Though the Court discourages the filing of motions for reconsideration, should a 

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 24 Filed 08/30/16 Page 5 of 7
- 6 - 

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 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Order Setting Final Pretrial Conference 

will: (1) set deadlines for the filing of and response to motions in limine; (2) instruct the 

parties on their duties in preparing for the Final Pretrial Conference and for trial; and (3) 

include a form for the completion of the parties’ joint Proposed Final Pretrial Order. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that because the deadlines set forth herein will 

trigger setting a trial date, the Court deems these deadlines to be the equivalent of a firm 

trial date.5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all motions for an award of attorneys’ fees 

shall be accompanied by an electronic spreadsheet, to be e-mailed to the Court and 

opposing counsel, containing an itemized statement of legal services with all information 

required by Local Rule 54.2(e)(1). This spreadsheet shall be organized with rows and 

columns and shall automatically total the amount of fees requested so as to enable the 

Court to efficiently review and recompute, if needed, the total amount of any award after 

disallowing any individual billing entries. This spreadsheet does not relieve the moving 

party of its burden under Local Rule 54.2(d) to attach all necessary supporting 

documentation to its memorandum of points and authorities filed in support of its motion. 

A party opposing a motion for attorneys’ fees shall e-mail to the Court and opposing 

counsel a copy of the moving party’s spreadsheet adding any objections to each contested 

billing entry (next to each row, in an additional column) so as to enable the Court to 

efficiently review the objections and recompute the total amount of any award after 

disallowing any individual billing entries. This spreadsheet does not relieve the nonmoving party of the requirements of Local Rule 54.2(f) concerning its responsive 

memorandum. 

 party choose to file a motion for reconsideration of an interlocutory order, such party shall file such motion under the standard set forth in Motorola, Inc. v. J.B. Rogers Mechanical Contractors, Inc., 215 F.R.D. 581, 586 (D. Ariz. 2003). 

5

 Additionally, the Court will attempt to set the Final Pretrial Conference within 90 

days of the resolution of the last dispositive motion, and will set Trial within 120 days of the Final Pretrial Conference. Therefore, the parties can calculate approximately when their trial date will be based on either the resolution of the last pending dispositive motion, or the setting of the Final Pretrial Conference. 

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 24 Filed 08/30/16 Page 6 of 7
- 7 - 

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 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall keep the Court informed 

regarding the possibility of settlement and, should settlement be reached, the parties shall 

file a Notice of Settlement with the Clerk of the Court. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court views compliance with the 

provisions of this Order as critical to its case management responsibilities and the 

responsibilities of the parties under Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

 Dated this 30th day of August, 2016. 

Case 2:15-cv-02166-JAT Document 24 Filed 08/30/16 Page 7 of 7