____________________________________

: 

PATRICIA J. DE LEO : UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

: DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Plaintiff(s), :

: Civil Action No. 10-6775 (MLC)

-vs- : ARB: Yes__ No X

:

MONMOUTH COUNTY MOSQUITO :

COMMISSION : ORDER SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

:

Defendant(s). :

____________________________________: 

IT IS on this 24 th Day of February, 2011; 

ORDERED, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, that a scheduling conference be

held before the Honorable Douglas E. Arpert, on March 31, 2011 at 11:30 a.m. in Court

room 6 West at the United States Courthouse, Trenton, New Jersey, and it is further

ORDERED that (1) prior to the above conference, all counsel and individuals

who are appearing on their own behalf (or “pro se”) confer on a joint discovery plan (see

L.Civ.R. 26.1(b)); (2) the joint discovery plan, as well as any disputes regarding it, be

submitted to the undersigned no later than three weeks prior to the above conference (see

L.Civ.R. 26.1(b)); the joint discovery plan should NOT be electronically filed, but may be

submitted to Chambers via regular mail, facsimile [(609) 989-0451], or e-mail

[dea_orders@njd.uscourts.gov]; (3) at the above conference, all parties not appearing pro se

shall be represented by counsel with full authority to speak for their clients in all pretrial

matters (see L.Civ.R. 16.1(a)); (4) Plaintiff(s) notify any party who hereafter enters an

appearance for the above conference and forward to that party a copy hereof; and (5) the

parties are to advise the Honorable Douglas E. Arpert immediately if this action has been

Case 3:10-cv-06775-JAP-DEA Document 7 Filed 02/24/11 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 80
settled or terminated, so that the above conference may be cancelled. 

Furthermore, counsel and litigants are advised that, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26, 30,

and 33, early disclosure requirements and limitations on depositions and interrogatories will

be enforced; therefore, counsel shall exchange the following information without formal

discovery requests:

(i) identities of individuals with knowledge of facts that support your

claims on defenses;

(ii) A copy of, or description by category and location of, documents and

things in the possession of counsel or the parties regarding the disputed

issues;

(iii) insurance agreements in force; and

(iv) statement of the basis for any damages claimed;

and it is further

ORDERED that the meeting of parties required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) shall take place

four (4) weeks prior to the date of the initial conference; and it is further

ORDERED that upon the entry of appearance of any new and/or additional counsel

subsequent to the date of this Order, Plaintiff’s counsel shall send a copy of this Scheduling

Order to the newly appearing attorney(s), but on any third party claim, the counsel for the

third party plaintiff shall send a copy of this Order to the newly entering counsel for third

party defendant(s); and it is further

ORDERED that all parties shall confer and submit a Joint Discovery Plan to the

Magistrate Judge not less than three (3) weeks prior to the above-stated conference date, as

required by L.Civ.R. 26.1(b) of this Court. The conference date should appear on the

Case 3:10-cv-06775-JAP-DEA Document 7 Filed 02/24/11 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 81
caption of the Joint Discovery Plan, which shall include, at a minimum, the following items:

(1) a brief statement of the facts underpinning the claims or defenses in the action, as well as

a brief statement of the legal issues in the case; (2) a description of all discovery conducted by

the parties to date; (3) a description of all discovery problems encountered to date, the efforts

undertaken by the parties to remedy these problems, and the parties’ suggested resolution of

the problems; (4) a description of the parties’ further discovery needs; (5) the parties’

estimate of the time needed to complete discovery; (6) a statement regarding whether expert

testimony will be necessary, and the parties’ anticipated schedule for retention of experts and

submission of their reports; (7) a statement regarding whether there should be any limitation

placed upon use of any discovery device and, if so, the reasons the limitation is sought; (8) a

description of any special discovery needs of the parties (e.g., videotape, telephone

depositions, or problems with out-of-state witnesses or documents, or discovery of digital

information) (see L.Civ.R. 26(d)); and it is further

ORDERED that in all patent cases where the parties cannot agree on a proposed

schedule, the Court will apply the scheduling provisions set forth in the Local Patent Rules

(see generally L.Civ.R. 9.3).

Sanctions may be imposed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(f) if Counsel or a pro se

litigant either fails to appear at the conference or appears unprepared. Each attendant at

the conference shall be fully familiar with the file, and have full authority to bind his or her

clients in all pretrial matters. 

 s/ Douglas E. Arpert 

HONORABLE DOUGLAS E. ARPERT

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-06775-JAP-DEA Document 7 Filed 02/24/11 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 82
******************************************************************************

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW

JERSEY

Mediation is the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program in this Court. Mediation is

governed by

1. Local Civil Rule 301.1. The mediation program under this rule is supervised by a judicial officer

(currently United States Magistrate Judge Madeline Cox Arleo) who is available to answer any

questions about the program.

Any district judge or magistrate judge may refer a civil action to mediation. This may be done

without the consent of the parties. However, the Court encourages parties to confer among

themselves and consent to mediation. Moreover, you are reminded that, when counsel confer

pursuant to Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rule 26.1, one of

the topics that must be addressed is the eligibility of a civil action for participation in ADR.

A civil action may be referred to mediation at any time. However, one of the advantages of

mediation is that, if successful, it enables parties to avoid the time and expense of discovery and

trial. Accordingly, the Court encourages parties to consent to mediation prior to or at the time that

automatic disclosures are made pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.

If parties consent to mediation, they may choose a mediator either from the list of certified

mediators maintained by the Court or by the selection of a private mediator. If a civil action is

referred to mediation without consent of the parties, the judicial officer responsible for supervision

of the program will select the mediator.

Mediation is non-judgmental. The role of the mediator is to assist the parties in reaching a

resolution of their dispute. The parties may confer with the mediator on an ex parte basis. Anything

said to the mediator will be deemed to be confidential and will not be revealed to another party or

to others without the party’s consent. The mediator’s hourly rate is $300.00, which is borne

equally by the parties.

If you would like further information with regard to the mediation program please review the

Guidelines for Mediation, Appendix Q to the Local Civil Rules. You may also make inquiries of

the judicial officer responsible for supervision of the program.

Civil actions in which there are pro se parties (incarcerated or not) are not eligible for mediation.

Case 3:10-cv-06775-JAP-DEA Document 7 Filed 02/24/11 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 83