Free Case Transferred In - District Transfer - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR

Document 9

Filed 05/21/2007

Page 1 of 3

ARBITRATION, CLOSED, RULE16, SCHEDO

U.S. District Court District of New Jersey [LIVE] (Newark) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS

CHEN et al v. ELMI et al Assigned to: Judge Katharine S. Hayden Referred to: Magistrate Judge Patty Shwartz Cause: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Tort/Motor Vehicle ( Plaintiff YIMIN CHEN

Date Filed: 01/24/2007 Date Terminated: 04/30/2007 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 350 Motor Vehicle Jurisdiction: Diversity

represented by GEORGE F. HENDRICKS HENDRICKS & HENDRICKS, ESQS. 73 PATERSON STREET NEW BRUNSWICK, NJ 08901 (732) 828-7800 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff QINGMIAN LI represented by GEORGE F. HENDRICKS (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant ABDI HASSAN ELMI Defendant J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC. represented by DELIA A. CLARK RAWLE & HENDERSON, LLP TEN LAKE CENTER EXECUTIVE PARK 401 ROUTE 73 NORTH SUITE 204 MARLTON, NJ 08053 (856) 797-8910 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant JOHN DOES 1-10

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR

Document 9

Filed 05/21/2007

Page 2 of 3

Defendant ABC CORPORATION 1-10

Date Filed 01/24/2007 01/24/2007

#

Docket Text CASE REFERRED to Arbitration. (dr, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007) 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC. from SUPERIOR CT OF MIDDLESEX CTY, case number L-10184-06. ( Filing fee $ 359 receipt number 305770) (Attachments: # 1 EXH A# 2 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT)(dr, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007) 2 Defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc.'s, ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC..(CLARK, DELIA) (Entered: 02/07/2007) 3 SCHEDULING ORDER IN AN ARBITRATION CASE setting Scheduling Conference for 4/9/2007 01:00 PM in Newark - Courtroom 10 before Magistrate Judge Patty Shwartz. Signed by Judge Patty Shwartz on 3/9/07. (aa, ) (Entered: 03/20/2007) 4 MOTION to Transfer Case to US District Court for the District of Delaware with Memorandum of Law by J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Order# 2 Exhibit A# 3 Exhibit B# 4 Exhibit C) (CLARK, DELIA) (Entered: 04/06/2007) Set Deadlines as to 4 MOTION to Transfer Case to US District Court for the District of Delaware with Memorandum of Law. Motion Hearing set for 5/29/2007 before Judge Katharine S. Hayden. [PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS MOTION WILL BE DECIDED ON THE PAPERS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTIFIED BY THE COURT] (DD, ) (Entered: 04/09/2007) Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Patty Shwartz : Scheduling Conference held on 4/9/2007. (aa, ) (Entered: 04/23/2007) 6 SCHEDULING ORDER IN AN ARBITRATION CASE: Telephone Conference set for 6/13/2007 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Patty Shwartz.,Discovery due by 9/7/2007.. Signed by Judge Patty Shwartz on 4/10/2007. (mn, ) (Entered: 04/12/2007) 5 SCHEDULING ORDER: Arbitration shall not commence before 8/22/2007; Telephone Conference set for 6/13/2007 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Patty Shwartz.,Discovery due by 9/7/2007.. Signed by Judge Patty Shwartz on 4/10/2007. (mn, ) (Entered: 04/11/2007) 7 RESPONSE in Opposition re 4 MOTION to Transfer Case to US District Court for the District of Delaware with Memorandum of Law filed by QINGMIAN LI. (HENDRICKS, GEORGE) (Entered: 04/25/2007) 8 ORDER granting 4 Motion to Transfer Case to DIST. OF DELAWARE. Signed by Judge Patty Shwartz on 4/27/07. (DD, ) (Entered: 04/30/2007)

02/07/2007

03/09/2007

04/06/2007

04/09/2007

04/09/2007 04/10/2007

04/11/2007

04/25/2007

04/30/2007

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR

Document 9

Filed 05/21/2007

Page 3 of 3

05/17/2007

9 transmittal letter of transfer to the USDC FOR THE DIST. OF DELAWARE w/certified copy of Order & Docket entries. (DD, ) (Entered: 05/17/2007)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
05/22/2007 08:55:05 PACER Login: Description: Billable Pages: ud0037 Docket Report 2 Client Code: Search Criteria: Cost: 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Start date: 1/1/1970 End date: 5/22/2007 0.16

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-21 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 11of 44 Filed 01/24/2007 Page of

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PSDocument 9-2 1 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 2 2 of 4 Filed 01/24/2007 Page of 4

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-21 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 33of 44 Filed 01/24/2007 Page of

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-21 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 44of 44 Filed 01/24/2007 Page of

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-3 Document 1-2 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 1 of of 6 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 1 6

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-3 Document 1-2 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 2 of of 6 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 2 6

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-3 Document 1-2 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 3 of of 6 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 3 6

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-3 Document 1-2 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 4 of of 6 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 4 6

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-3 Document 1-2 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 5 of of 6 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 5 6

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-3 Document 1-2 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 6 of of 6 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 6 6

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-4 Document 1-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 1 of of 1 Filed 01/24/2007 Page 1 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY YMIN CHEN and QINGMIAN LI, Plaintiffs, v. HASSAN ABDI ELMI, J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : : : C.A. No.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FORM Please check one box: The nongovernmental corporate party, , in the above listed civil action does not have any parent corporation and publicly held corporation that owns 10% or more of its stock. The nongovernmental corporate party, J.B Hunt Transport, Inc. in the above listed civil action has the following parent corporation(s) and publicly held corporation(s) that owns 10% or more of its stock: J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

Date: JANUARY 24, 2007

Signature: Counsel for: Defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport Inc.

2004966-1

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 11of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY YIMIN CHEN and QINGMIAN LI, Plaintiffs, v. HASSAN ABDI ELMI, J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC., JOHN DOES 1-10 and ABC CORPORATION 1-10, Defendants. : : : CIVIL ACTION NO.:2:07-00456 (KSH) : : : : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED : :

DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT Defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., by and through its counsel, Rawle & Henderson
LLP,

hereby answers plaintiffs' Complaint as follows: FIRST COUNT 1. Admitted in part; denied in part. Answering defendant admits only that on August

4, 2005, plaintiff, Yimin Chen, drove a motor vehicle on US Route 95 northbound in New castle County, Delaware. The remaining averments contained in paragraph 1 of the First Count of the Complaint are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, paragraph 1 of the First Count of the Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 2. Admitted in part; denied in part. Answering defendant admits only that on August

4, 2005, defendant Elmi drove a motor vehicle owned by defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., on US Route 95 northbound in New Castle County, Delaware. The remaining averments contained in paragraph 2 of the First Count of the Complaint are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, paragraph 2 of the First Count of the Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required.

2007514-1

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 22of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

3.

Denied. Answering defendant denies any negligence or carelessness and demands

strict proof thereof at trial. By way of further answer, the averments contained in paragraph 3 of the First Count of the Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 4. Denied. Answering defendant denies any negligence or carelessness and demands

strict proof thereof at trial. Answering defendant has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments contained in paragraph 4 of the First Count of the Complaint, and therefore, said averments are denied. By way of further answer, paragraph 4 of the First Count of the Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. WHEREFORE, answering defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., demands judgment in its favor and against the plaintiff, Yimin Chen, dismissing plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice together with an award of costs and disbursements incurred by answering defendant, including attorneys' fees together with such other relief in favor of said defendant as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate. SECOND COUNT 1. Answering defendant incorporates by reference its answers to all paragraphs in

the First Count of the Complaint as though the same were set forth fully herein. 2. Admitted in part; denied in part. Answering defendant admits only that on August

4, 2005, plaintiff, Qingmian Li, was an occupant of a motor vehicle driven by plaintiff, Yimin Chen. The remaining averment contained in paragraph 2 of the Second Count of the Complaint is a conclusion of law to which no responsive pleading is required, and therefore, said averment is denied.

2007514-1

2

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 33of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

3.

Admitted in part; denied in part. Answering defendant admits only that on August

4, 2005, defendant Elmi drove a motor vehicle owned by defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., on US Route 95 northbound in New Castle County, Delaware. The remaining averments contained in paragraph 3 of the Second Count of the Complaint are denied and strict proof thereof is demanded at trial. By way of further answer, paragraph 3 of the Second Count of the Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 4. Denied. Answering defendant denies any negligence or carelessness and demand

strict proof thereof at trial. By way of further answer, the averments contained in paragraph 4 of the Second Count of the Complaint are conclusions of law to which no response is required. 5. Denied. Answering defendant denies any negligence or carelessness and demand

strict proof thereof at trial. Answering defendant has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments contained in paragraph 5 of the Second Count of the Complaint, and therefore, said averments are denied. By way of further answer, paragraph 5 of the Second Count of the Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. WHEREFORE, answering defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., demands judgment in its favor and against the plaintiff, Qingmian Li, dismissing plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice together with an award of costs and disbursements incurred by answering defendant, including attorneys' fees together with such other relief in favor of said defendant as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate. THIRD COUNT 1. Answering defendant incorporates by reference its answers to all paragraphs in

the First and Second Counts of the Complaint as though the same were set forth fully herein.

2007514-1

3

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 44of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

2.

Admitted in part; denied in part. Answering defendant admits only that on August

4, 2005, defendant Elmi drove a motor vehicle owned by his employer, defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. Answering defendant denies any negligence and demand strict proof thereof at trial. By way of further answer, paragraph 2 of the Third Count of the Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 3 Denied. Answering defendant denies any negligence or carelessness and demand

strict proof thereof at trial. Answering defendant has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments contained in paragraph 3 of the Third Count of the Complaint, and therefore, said averments are denied. By way of further answer, paragraph 3 of the Third Count of the Complaint contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. WHEREFORE, answering defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., demands judgment in its favor and against the plaintiffs dismissing plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice together with an award of costs and disbursements incurred by answering defendant, including attorneys' fees together with such other relief in favor of said defendant as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate. FOURTH COUNT 1. Answering defendant incorporates by reference its answers to all paragraphs in

the First, Second and Third Counts of the Complaint as though the same were set forth fully herein. 2. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 2 of the Fourth Count of the

Complaint are addressed to a defendant other than answering defendant herein. By way of further answer, this defendant has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a

2007514-1

4

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 55of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 2 of the Fourth Count of the Complaint, and therefore, said averments are denied. 3. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 3 of the Fourth Count of the

Complaint are addressed to a defendant other than answering defendant herein. By way of further answer, this defendant has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 3 of the Fourth Count of the Complaint, and therefore, said averments are denied. WHEREFORE, answering defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., demands judgment in its favor and against the plaintiffs, dismissing plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice together with an award of costs and disbursements incurred by answering defendant, including attorneys' fees together with such other relief in favor of said defendant as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate. FIFTH COUNT 1. Answering defendant incorporates by reference its answers to all paragraphs in

the First, Second, Third and Fourth Counts of the Complaint as though the same were set forth fully herein. 2. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 2 of the Fifth Count of the

Complaint are addressed to a defendant other than answering defendant herein. By way of further answer, this defendant has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 2 of the Fifth Count of the Complaint, and therefore, said averments are denied. 3. Denied. The averments contained in paragraph 3 of the Fifth Count of the

Complaint are addressed to a defendant other than answering defendant herein. By way of

2007514-1

5

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 66of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

further answer, this defendant has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the averments contained in paragraph 3 of the Fifth Count of the Complaint, and therefore, said averments are denied. WHEREFORE, defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., demands judgment in its favor and against the plaintiffs, dismissing plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice together with an award of costs and disbursements incurred by answering defendant, including attorneys' fees together with such other relief in favor of said defendant as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST DEFENSE Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. SECOND DEFENSE Answering defendant did not breach any duty owed to plaintiffs. THIRD DEFENSE Answering defendant avers that plaintiffs were guilty of contributory negligence. FOURTH DEFENSE The injuries or damages sustained by plaintiffs, if any, were not actually or proximately caused by an act or omission on the part of the answering defendant. FIFTH DEFENSE Plaintiffs' claims are barred or reduced in accordance with the applicable comparative negligence act. SIXTH DEFENSE Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, if any, were caused in whole or in part by the intervening and superseding acts of third parties over whom answering defendant had no control.

2007514-1

6

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 77of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

SEVENTH DEFENSE Answering defendant, at all relevant times, acted with due care and complied with all requirements of applicable law. EIGHTH DEFENSE Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, waiver and/or the entire controversy doctrine. NINTH DEFENSE Plaintiffs have failed to satisfy the requirements of the New Jersey Automobile Reparation Reform Act, N.J.S.A. 39:6A-1-35, and pursuant thereto, plaintiffs' claims are limited or barred in their entirety. TENTH DEFENSE Plaintiffs' claims are limited or barred in accordance with N.J.S.A. 39:6A-1 et seq. and/or any other applicable law regarding tort option selection. ELEVENTH DEFENSE Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damages, if any. TWELFTH DEFENSE Answering defendant was confronted with a sudden emergency and exercised all reasonable care under the circumstances. THIRTEENTH DEFENSE Answering defendant is entitled to a credit/set off for any expenses paid by insurance or other third parties who are claimed as damages by the plaintiffs. FOURTEENTH DEFENSE Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59-1, answering defendant demands all reasonable counsel fees and court costs to the extent that this is a frivolous law-suit. FIFTEENTH DEFENSE Plaintiffs' claims are barred under the Doctrine of Avoidable Consequences.

2007514-1

7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 88of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

SIXTEENTH DEFENSE This Court lacks jurisdiction over this defendant by reason of insufficiency of process and reserves the right to move at or before trial for a dismissal of the Complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction because of insufficiency of process and/or service. SEVENTEENTH DEFENSE Answering defendant asserts all defenses available to it pursuant to the terms of the applicable No-Fault Statute. EIGHTEENTH DEFENSE Answering defendant adopts and incorporates by reference as if the same were set forth at length herein, all other affirmative defenses which have been or will be asserted by any other party in this action, except those which may contain allegations of liability against this defendant, to the extent that such defenses are applicable to said defendant. NINETEENTH DEFENSE This Court lacks in personam jurisdiction over a defendant and answering defendant reserves the right to move at or before trial for a dismissal of the Complaint on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction and because this party is an indispensable party. WHEREFORE, defendant, J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., demands judgment in its favor and against the plaintiffs, dismissing plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice together with an award of costs and disbursements incurred by answering defendant, including attorneys' fees together with such other relief in favor of said defendant as this Honorable Court shall deem appropriate.

2007514-1

8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 99of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page of 10

RESERVATION OF DEFENSES Answering defendant reserves the right to assert any of the defenses, objections and/or claims that are or may in the future be warranted against any and all parties presently named and/or in the future to be named in the underlying controversy.

RAWLE & HENDERSON LLP

By: Jon Michael Dumont 1609 Delia A. Clark, Esq. 6736 Attorneys for Defendants 40 Lake Center Executive Park 401 Route 73 North, Suite 200 Marlton, NJ 08053 (856) 797-8910 Attorneys for Defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. Dated: February 7, 2007

2007514-1

9

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-52 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 10 of 10 Filed 02/07/2007 Page 10 of 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE It is hereby certified that a true and correct copy of the within-captioned Answer filed electronically was served electronically and via first-class mail, postage prepaid to:

George F. Hendricks Hendricks & Hendricks 73 Patterson Street New Brunswick, NJ 108901.

RAWLE & HENDERSON LLP

By:

______________ Jon Michael Dumont Delia A. Clark Attorneys for Defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.

Dated: January 31, 2007

2007514-1

10

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 11of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

____________________________________ : YIMIN CHEN, et al. : : Plaintiff(s), : : -vs: : ABDI HASSAN ELMI, et al. : : : Defendant(s), : : ____________________________________:

Civil Action No. 07-456(KSH)

SCHEDULING ORDER IN AN ARBITRATION CASE

TO:

George F. Hendricks, Esq. Hendricks & Hendricks, Esqs. 73 Paterson Street New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901

Delia A. Clark, Esq. Rawle & Henderson, LLP notified via electronic filing

It is on this 9th day of March, 2007,

ORDERED THAT: (1) A scheduling conference shall be conducted before the undersigned at 1:00 P.M.

on April 9, 2007, in Courtroom 10, U.S. Post Office & Courthouse Bldg., 2 Federal Square, Newark, N.J. See Local Civil Rule 16.1(a)(1); (2) Early disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 will be enforced. Therefore, the

parties shall immediately exchange the information described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(A)-(D) without awaiting a discovery request;

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 22of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

(3)

At least fourteen (14) days prior to the conference scheduled herein, the parties shall

confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and shall submit a discovery plan to the undersigned not later than 72 hours prior to the conference with the Court. THE DISCOVERY PLAN SHALL BE IN THE FORM OF THE ATTACHED AND SHALL BE SUBMITTED JOINTLY; (4) The parties are directed to Local Civil Rule 26.1(d), which addresses "discovery of

digital information including computer-based information," describes the obligations of counsel with regard to their clients' information management systems, and directs parties to "confer and attempt to agree on computer-based and other digital discovery matters;" (5) No formal discovery demands may issue pending the conference with the Court.

Unless the parties stipulate otherwise or leave of Court is obtained, the case management order will limit the number of interrogatories, including subparts, to 25 and depositions that each party may seek to 10. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b), 26(d). (6) At the conference with the Court, all parties who are not appearing pro se must be

represented by counsel who actually has full authority to bind their clients in all pretrial matters. Counsel shall also be prepared to discuss the merits of the case and have settlement authority. Clients or persons with authority over the matter shall be available by telephone. Local Civil Rule 16.1(a)(3); (7) At the conference scheduled herein, the Court will address scheduling of all motions.

No motions shall be filed without prior leave of the Court. If any motions have already been filed, immediately advise the Court in writing regarding the nature of the motions and the present status of same; (8) Plaintiff(s) shall notify any party who hereafter enters an appearance of the conference

scheduled herein and forward to that party a copy of this Order; (9) The Court has implemented an electronic case filing system for all documents filed with

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 33of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

the Clerk of Court. Beginning January 31, 2005, electronic case filing will be mandatory for all cases except those involving a pro se litigant. Orders will be electronically filed. Paper copies will be provided to pro se litigants. Registered counsel will be notified via email when an order is filed but are responsible for retrieving and reviewing the contents. (10) To register as an electronic filer, obtain on-line training, and review policies and

procedures, contact the Clerk's Office or visit the website at pacer.njd.uscourts.gov. On-site training is also available and can be arranged by contacting 973-645-4439. (11) The parties shall advise the undersigned immediately if this action has been settled or

terminated so that the above conference may be cancelled; (12) (13) Failure to comply with the terms hereof may result in the imposition of sanctions; Communications to the Court by facsimile will not be accepted. All communications to

the Court shall be in writing or by telephone conference; and (14) This action is subject to compulsory arbitration and you are directed to familiarize

yourselves with the content of Local Civil Rule 201.

s/Patty Shwartz HON. PATTY SHWARTZ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 44of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

: Plaintiff(s), v. : : : Defendant(s). :

Civil Action No.

JOINT DISCOVERY PLAN

1.

For each party, set forth the name of the party, attorney appearing, the firm name, address, e-mail address, telephone number and facsimile number. In addition, the lead counsel on each side should bring a business card which contains his/her e-mail address to the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference.

2.

(a) Set forth a brief description of the case, including the causes of action and affirmative defenses asserted.

(b) Is this a fee-shifting case? Yes No

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 55of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

If so, set forth legal authority.

3.

Has this action been: Settled_______ Discontinued______ If so, has there been a Stipulation/Dismissal filed? Yes _____ No _____

4.

Have settlement discussions taken place? Yes _____ No _____ If so, when? (a) What was plaintiff's last demand? (1) Monetary demand: $ (2) Non-monetary demand: (b) What was defendant's last offer? (1) (2) Monetary offer: $ Non-monetary offer:

5.

Core discovery needed to be able to discuss settlement in a meaningful way:

6.

The parties [have _____ -have not _____] exchanged the information required by Fed. R.Civ. P. 26(a)(1). If not, state the reason therefor.

7.

Explain any problems in connection with completing the disclosures required by Fed. R.Civ. P. 26(a)(1).

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 66of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

8.

The parties [have _____ -have not _____] conducted discovery other than the above disclosures. If so, describe.

9.

The parties [have _____ -have not _____] met pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). (a) If not, state the reason therefor.

(b) If so, state the date of the meeting and the persons in attendance.

10.

The following [is _____ -is not _____] a proposed joint discovery plan. (a) Discovery is needed on the following subjects:

(b)

Discovery [should _____ -should not _____] be conducted in phases or be limited to particular issues. Explain.

(c) (d) (e) (f)

Maximum of _____ interrogatories by each party to each other party. Maximum of _____ depositions to be taken by each party. Plaintiff's expert report due on Defendant's expert report due on . .

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 77of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

(g) (h) (i)

Motions to amend or to add parties to be filed by

.

Dispositive motions to be served within __________ days of completion of discovery. All discovery to be completed by . (If there is a need for a liability

expert and it is necessary to defer the completion of expert discovery beyond this deadline, please state the reason why and the proposed date for completion of expert discovery.) (j) Set forth any special discovery mechanism or procedure requested, including data preservation orders or protective orders:

(k) 11.

A pretrial conference may take place on

.

Do you anticipate any discovery problem(s)? Yes ____ No ____ If so, explain.

12.

Do you anticipate any special discovery needs (i.e., videotape/telephone depositions; problems with out-of-state witnesses or documents, etc.)? Yes _____ No _____ If so, explain.

13.

State whether this case is appropriate for voluntary arbitration (pursuant to Local Civil Rule 201.1 or otherwise), mediation (pursuant to Local Civil Rule 301.1 or otherwise), appointment of a special master or other special procedure. If not, explain why and state whether any such procedure may be appropriate at a later time (i.e., after exchange of pretrial disclosures, after completion of depositions, after disposition or dispositive motions, etc.).

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 88of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

14. 15.

Is this case appropriate for bifurcation? Yes ____ No ____ An interim status/settlement conference (with clients in attendance), should be held during the month of , 200 .

16.

We [do _____ do not _____] consent to the trial being conducted by a Magistrate Judge.

_____________________________________ Attorneys for Plaintiff(s)

Date

____________________________________ Attorneys for Defendant(s)

Date

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-63 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 99of 99 Filed 03/09/2007 Page of

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 Local Civil Rule 301.1. The mediation program under this rule is supervised by a judicial officer (at present United States Magistrate Judge Ronald J. Hedges) 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 first six hours of a mediator's time is free. The mediator's hourly rate thereafter is $150.00, 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, which are available on the Court's Web Site "pacer.njd.uscourts.gov" and appear as 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.

DNJ-Med-001 Rev. (10/00)

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 11of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 22of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 33of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 44of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 55of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 66of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 77of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 88of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 99of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 10 of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 10 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 11 of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 11 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-74 Document

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 12 of 12 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 12 of 12

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-8 Document 4-2 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 1 of of 1 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 1 1

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-9 Document 4-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 1 of of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 1 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-9 Document 4-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 2 of of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 2 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-9 Document 4-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 3 of of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 3 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-9 Document 4-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 4 of of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 4 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-9 Document 4-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 5 of of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 5 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-9 Document 4-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 6 of of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 6 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-9 Document 4-3 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 7 of of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 7 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-10 Document 4-4

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 1 1 of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-10 Document 4-4

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 2 2 of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-10 Document 4-4

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 3 3 of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-10 Document 4-4

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 4 4 of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-10 Document 4-4

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 5 5 of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-10 Document 4-4

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 6 6 of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-10 Document 4-4

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 7 7 of 7 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 7

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 1 1 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 2 2 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 3 3 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 4 4 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 5 5 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 6 6 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 7 7 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 9-11 Document 4-5

Filed 05/21/2007 Page 8 8 of 8 Filed 04/06/2007 Page of 8

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-12 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 5

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/11/2007

Page 1 of 4 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ____________________________________ : YIMIN CHEN, et al. : : : Plaintiffs : : v. : : : ABDI HASSAN ELMI, et al. : : : : Defendants : ____________________________________:

Civil Action No. 07-456(KSH)

SCHEDULING ORDER IN AN ARBITRATION CASE

THIS MATTER having come before the Court for a scheduling conference pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on April 9, 2007; and for good cause shown, IT IS on this 10th day of April, 2007, ORDERED THAT: a. No later than April 13, 2007, the plaintiffs shall advise the Court of any opposition to the motion to transfer. b. Defendant shall send plaintiffs a copy of this Order and Judge Hayden's instructions for preparing the Final Pretrial Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT: I. ARBITRATION 1. This matter is subject/referred to arbitration pursuant to Local R. Civ. P. 201.1. Counsel will receive further instructions and guidelines regarding arbitration directly form the Clerk of the Court. Arbitration shall not commence before August 22, 2007. II. COURT DATES 2. There shall be a telephone status conference before the undersigned on June 13, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. Plaintiff shall initiate the telephone call.

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-12 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 5

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/11/2007

Page 2 of 4 Page 2 of 4

3. There will be a settlement conference before the undersigned on TO BE SET. Five (5) business days before the conference, each party should submit a confidential memorandum to the Court, not to exceed 5 pages, summarizing the relevant facts, the respective legal positions, status of the case, and the client's position on settlement. Trial Counsel and clients with full settlement authority must attend the conference. If the trial counsel and client with full settlement

authority do not appear, the settlement conference may be cancelled or rescheduled and the noncompliant party and/or attorney may be sanctioned, which may include an assessment of the costs and expenses incurred by those parties who appeared as directed.

III. DISCOVERY AND MOTION PRACTICE 4. a. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 disclosures are to be exchanged on or before April 23, 2007. b. Medical authorizations shall be provided to the defendants no later than May 30, 2007. 5. Discovery necessary to engage in meaningful settlement discussions:

responses to the interrogatories and document demands plaintiff's depositions plaintiff's expert report possibly a medical examination of plaintiff and will be produced by July 24, 2007 . 6. The parties may serve interrogatories limited to 25 single questions including subparts and requests for production of documents on or before April 30, 2007, which shall be responded to no later than May 30, 2007. 7. a. The number of depositions to be taken by each side shall not exceed September 7, 2007. No objections to questions posed at depositions shall be made other than as to lack of foundation, form or privilege. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(d) (3) (A). No instruction not to answer shall be given unless a privilege is implicated. b. Depositions of the plaintiff shall take place in New Jersey. 8. Fact discovery is to remain open through September 7, 2007. No discovery is to be issued or engaged in beyond that date, except upon application and for good cause shown. 9. Counsel shall confer in a good faith attempt to informally resolve any discovery disputes before seeking the Court's intervention. Should such informal effort fail to resolve the dispute, the matter shall be brought to the Court's attention in the first instance by a brief letter outlining the dispute. The Court will thereafter schedule a telephonic discovery conference pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) to resolve the dispute. See L. Civ. R. 16.1(f)(1).

If the dispute involves an alleged deficiency in a response to a discovery request,

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-12 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 5

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/11/2007

Page 3 of 4 Page 3 of 4

then the parties shall submit a joint letter that sets forth: (a) the request, (b) the response; (c) efforts to resolve the dispute; (d) why the complaining party believes the information is relevant and why the responding party's response continues to be deficient; and (e) why the responding party believes the response is sufficient. No further submissions regarding the dispute may be submitted without leave of Court. If necessary, the Court will thereafter schedule a telephone conference to resolve the dispute.
No discovery motion or motion for sanctions for failure to provide discovery shall be made before utilizing the procedures set forth in these paragraphs without prior leave of Court. Any unresolved discovery disputes (other than those that arise during depositions) must be brought before the Court no later than June 29, 2007 and the Court will not entertain applications concerning discovery matters, informally or otherwise, after this date. 10. Any motion to amend pleadings or join parties must be filed by none.

11. All dispositive motions shall be discussed in advance of filing with the undersigned either in person or by teleconference. If leave is granted to file a summary judgment motion, the following protocol shall apply:

a. Each motion for summary judgment shall be supported by a separate, short, and concise statement of material facts, set forth in numbered paragraphs, as to which the moving party contends there is no genuine issue of material fact to be tried. Each fact asserted in the statement shall be supported by a record citation. A "record citation" is a citation to a specific page or paragraph of identified record material supporting the assertion. b. Each response in opposition shall be accompanied by a separate, short, and concise statement of material facts. The opposing statement shall admit, deny or qualify the facts by reference to each numbered paragraph of the moving party's statement of material facts and unless a fact is admitted, shall support each denial or qualification by a record citation. The opposing statement may contain in a separate section additional facts, set forth in separate numbered paragraphs and supported by a record citation. c. In the event a party seeks to submit a reply, the party shall file a formal request for permission to do so within the time period provided by Local Rule, attaching the proposed reply. Accompanying the proposed reply shall be a separate, short, and concise statement of material facts which shall be limited to any additional facts submitted by the opposing party. The reply statement shall admit, deny or qualify such additional facts by reference to the numbered paragraphs of the opposing party's statement of material facts, and unless a fact is admitted, shall support each denial or qualification by a record citation. d. Facts contained in a supporting or opposing statement of material facts, if supported by record citations, shall be deemed admitted unless properly controverted. The Court may disregard any statement of fact not supported by a specific citation to record material properly

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-12 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 5

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/11/2007

Page 4 of 4 Page 4 of 4

considered on summary judgment. The Court shall have no independent duty to search or consider any part of the record not specifically referenced in the parties' separate statement of facts. e. Local Rules governing electronic filing and length, font-size, and format of moving, opposing and reply briefs shall continue to apply as appropriate. Parties shall provide the Court with two hard copies of all submissions by delivering same to the Clerk's Office, Attention Judge Katharine Hayden.
IV. EXPERTS 12. 13. All affirmative expert reports shall be delivered by June 15, 2007. All responding expert reports shall be delivered by August 15, 2007.

14. a. All expert reports are to be in the form and content as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) (2)(B). No expert shall testify at trial as to any opinions or base those opinions on facts not substantially disclosed in the experts report. b. All expert depositions shall be completed by only if a party files a timely request for a trial de novo. V. MISCELLANEOUS 15. The Court may from time to time schedule conferences as may be required, either sua sponte or at the request of a party. 16. Since all dates set forth herein are established with the assistance and knowledge of counsel, there will be no extensions except for good cause shown and by leave of Court, even with consent of all counsel. 17. A copy of every pleading, document or written communication with the Court shall be served on all other parties to the action. Any such communication which does not recite or contain a certification of such service may be disregarded by the Court. 18. Communications to the Court by facsimile will not be accepted. All communications to the Court shall be in writing or by telephone conference. 19. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS. s/Patty Shwartz UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-13 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 6

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/10/2007

Page 1 of 4 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ____________________________________ : YIMIN CHEN, et al. : : : Plaintiffs : : v. : : : ABDI HASSAN ELMI, et al. : : : : Defendants : ____________________________________:

Civil Action No. 07-456(KSH)

SCHEDULING ORDER IN AN ARBITRATION CASE

THIS MATTER having come before the Court for a scheduling conference pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on April 9, 2007; and for good cause shown, IT IS on this 10th day of April, 2007, ORDERED THAT: a. No later than April 13, 2007, the plaintiffs shall advise the Court of any opposition to the motion to transfer. b. Defendant shall send plaintiffs a copy of this Order and Judge Hayden's instructions for preparing the Final Pretrial Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT: I. ARBITRATION 1. This matter is subject/referred to arbitration pursuant to Local R. Civ. P. 201.1. Counsel will receive further instructions and guidelines regarding arbitration directly form the Clerk of the Court. Arbitration shall not commence before August 22, 2007. II. COURT DATES 2. There shall be a telephone status conference before the undersigned on June 13, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. Plaintiff shall initiate the telephone call.

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-13 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 6

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/10/2007

Page 2 of 4 Page 2 of 4

3. There will be a settlement conference before the undersigned on TO BE SET. Five (5) business days before the conference, each party should submit a confidential memorandum to the Court, not to exceed 5 pages, summarizing the relevant facts, the respective legal positions, status of the case, and the client's position on settlement. Trial Counsel and clients with full settlement authority must attend the conference. If the trial counsel and client with full settlement

authority do not appear, the settlement conference may be cancelled or rescheduled and the noncompliant party and/or attorney may be sanctioned, which may include an assessment of the costs and expenses incurred by those parties who appeared as directed.

III. DISCOVERY AND MOTION PRACTICE 4. a. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 disclosures are to be exchanged on or before April 23, 2007. b. Medical authorizations shall be provided to the defendants no later than May 30, 2007. 5. Discovery necessary to engage in meaningful settlement discussions:

responses to the interrogatories and document demands plaintiff's depositions plaintiff's expert report possibly a medical examination of plaintiff and will be produced by July 24, 2007 . 6. The parties may serve interrogatories limited to 25 single questions including subparts and requests for production of documents on or before April 30, 2007, which shall be responded to no later than May 30, 2007. 7. a. The number of depositions to be taken by each side shall not exceed September 7, 2007. No objections to questions posed at depositions shall be made other than as to lack of foundation, form or privilege. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(d) (3) (A). No instruction not to answer shall be given unless a privilege is implicated. b. Depositions of the plaintiff shall take place in New Jersey. 8. Fact discovery is to remain open through September 7, 2007. No discovery is to be issued or engaged in beyond that date, except upon application and for good cause shown. 9. Counsel shall confer in a good faith attempt to informally resolve any discovery disputes before seeking the Court's intervention. Should such informal effort fail to resolve the dispute, the matter shall be brought to the Court's attention in the first instance by a brief letter outlining the dispute. The Court will thereafter schedule a telephonic discovery conference pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) to resolve the dispute. See L. Civ. R. 16.1(f)(1).

If the dispute involves an alleged deficiency in a response to a discovery request,

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-13 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 6

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/10/2007

Page 3 of 4 Page 3 of 4

then the parties shall submit a joint letter that sets forth: (a) the request, (b) the response; (c) efforts to resolve the dispute; (d) why the complaining party believes the information is relevant and why the responding party's response continues to be deficient; and (e) why the responding party believes the response is sufficient. No further submissions regarding the dispute may be submitted without leave of Court. If necessary, the Court will thereafter schedule a telephone conference to resolve the dispute.
No discovery motion or motion for sanctions for failure to provide discovery shall be made before utilizing the procedures set forth in these paragraphs without prior leave of Court. Any unresolved discovery disputes (other than those that arise during depositions) must be brought before the Court no later than June 29, 2007 and the Court will not entertain applications concerning discovery matters, informally or otherwise, after this date. 10. Any motion to amend pleadings or join parties must be filed by none.

11. All dispositive motions shall be discussed in advance of filing with the undersigned either in person or by teleconference. If leave is granted to file a summary judgment motion, the following protocol shall apply:

a. Each motion for summary judgment shall be supported by a separate, short, and concise statement of material facts, set forth in numbered paragraphs, as to which the moving party contends there is no genuine issue of material fact to be tried. Each fact asserted in the statement shall be supported by a record citation. A "record citation" is a citation to a specific page or paragraph of identified record material supporting the assertion. b. Each response in opposition shall be accompanied by a separate, short, and concise statement of material facts. The opposing statement shall admit, deny or qualify the facts by reference to each numbered paragraph of the moving party's statement of material facts and unless a fact is admitted, shall support each denial or qualification by a record citation. The opposing statement may contain in a separate section additional facts, set forth in separate numbered paragraphs and supported by a record citation. c. In the event a party seeks to submit a reply, the party shall file a formal request for permission to do so within the time period provided by Local Rule, attaching the proposed reply. Accompanying the proposed reply shall be a separate, short, and concise statement of material facts which shall be limited to any additional facts submitted by the opposing party. The reply statement shall admit, deny or qualify such additional facts by reference to the numbered paragraphs of the opposing party's statement of material facts, and unless a fact is admitted, shall support each denial or qualification by a record citation. d. Facts contained in a supporting or opposing statement of material facts, if supported by record citations, shall be deemed admitted unless properly controverted. The Court may disregard any statement of fact not supported by a specific citation to record material properly

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-13 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 6

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/10/2007

Page 4 of 4 Page 4 of 4

considered on summary judgment. The Court shall have no independent duty to search or consider any part of the record not specifically referenced in the parties' separate statement of facts. e. Local Rules governing electronic filing and length, font-size, and format of moving, opposing and reply briefs shall continue to apply as appropriate. Parties shall provide the Court with two hard copies of all submissions by delivering same to the Clerk's Office, Attention Judge Katharine Hayden.
IV. EXPERTS 12. 13. All affirmative expert reports shall be delivered by June 15, 2007. All responding expert reports shall be delivered by August 15, 2007.

14. a. All expert reports are to be in the form and content as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) (2)(B). No expert shall testify at trial as to any opinions or base those opinions on facts not substantially disclosed in the experts report. b. All expert depositions shall be completed by only if a party files a timely request for a trial de novo. V. MISCELLANEOUS 15. The Court may from time to time schedule conferences as may be required, either sua sponte or at the request of a party. 16. Since all dates set forth herein are established with the assistance and knowledge of counsel, there will be no extensions except for good cause shown and by leave of Court, even with consent of all counsel. 17. A copy of every pleading, document or written communication with the Court shall be served on all other parties to the action. Any such communication which does not recite or contain a certification of such service may be disregarded by the Court. 18. Communications to the Court by facsimile will not be accepted. All communications to the Court shall be in writing or by telephone conference. 19. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS. s/Patty Shwartz UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 1 of 13 Page 1 of 13

HENDRICKS & HENDRICKS 73 Paterson Street New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901 (732) 828-7800 Attorney for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY YIMIN CHEN and QINGMIAN LI, Plaintiff, vs. HASSAN ABDI ELMI, et al., Defendants. PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE CIVIL ACTION NO: 2:07-cv-456-KSH

Plaintiffs, Ymin Chen and Qingmian Li, by and through their attorneys, Hendricks & Hendricks, Esqs., hereby submit the following memorandum of law in opposition to the Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.'s Motion to Transfer Venue of this case to the District of Delaware. I. COUNTERSTATEMENT OF FACTS: Defendant J.B. Hunt was properly served with the Complaint in this matter and has, as of this date, filed an Answer. Defendant J.B. Hunt is, without question, not only authorized to conduct business in the continental United States and Canada, but is authorized to and in fact does conduct business in the State of New Jersey. (Exhibit A). Defendant Hassan Abdi Elmi has not been served with the Summons and Complaint as of the date of this Opposition. On information and belief, he no longer resides in the State of Tennessee, and it is highly likely that he will never be successfully served with process in this matter.

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 2 of 13 Page 2 of 13

The Plaintiffs both reside in the State of New Jersey. One witness to the accident, Eric Haug, also is a resident of the State of New Jersey. Other than the initial emergency treatment, all health care providers of the Plaintiffs are residents and practice medicine in the State of New Jersey. One of the witnesses to the accident is a resident of New York, which, although a different state, is so close in proximity to New Jersey that it cannot be said that this witness would in any way be inconvenienced by this matter being venued in New Jersey. Certainly, however, that witness would be inconvenienced if this matter were venued in the State of Delaware. The Defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.'s counsel has asserted in her statement of facts that "The undersigned has been retained as counsel for defendant, Hassan Abdi Elmi, and he consents to this removal." (See Defendant's "Notice of Removal". The Defendant, J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., is the only party which has entered an appearance in this matter. Mr. Elmi has not entered an appearance, has not been served with process, and other than counsel for Defendant J.B. Hunt's statement, there is no indication and no affidavit or certification of Mr. Elmi attached to the papers to indicate that he does in fact consent to the change of venue. II. LEGAL ARGUMENT It is clear that the Defendant, J.B. Hunt, does not have standing to assert the argument that the instant matter should be removed from the District of New Jersey to the District of Delaware. In essence, counsel for J.B. Hunt is attempting to have their cake and eat it too. The attorney has filed the application as counsel for Defendant J.B. Hunt, but then makes the claim that Defendant Elmi has also retained them and consents to the removal. If a removal for lack of personal jurisdiction is to be requested, it must be requested by the party to whom submission to jurisdiction would, if minimum contacts do not exist, be improper. Mr. Elmi has not made the application and, indeed cannot make an application because he has not yet been served with the

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 3 of 13 Page 3 of 13

Complaint. It is possible, in fact, that he may never be served with the Complaint. If he is not served with the Complaint, then any removal of this action will be folly. All other parties have contacts with New Jersey. Certainly, J.B. Hunt has significant contacts. "Prior to judicial resolution of a dispute, an individual must as a threshold matter show that he has standing to bring the action." Pittsburgh Pallisades Park, LLC v. COM. 888 A.2d. 655 (Pa. 2005). It is a well-established tenet of standing that a "litigant must assert his or her own legal rights and interests, and cannot rest a claim to relief on the legal rights or interests of third parties." Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400, 410, 111 S.Ct. 1364, 113 L.Ed.2d 411 (1991); see also Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 474-75, 102 S.Ct. 752, 70 L.Ed.2d 700 (1982); Wheeler v. Travelers Ins. Co., 22 F.3d 534, 538 (3d Cir.1994). This principle is based on the assumption that "third parties themselves usually will be the best proponents of their own rights," Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106, 114, 96 S.Ct. 2868, 49 L.Ed.2d 826 (1976) (plurality opinion), which serves to foster judicial restraint and ensure the clear presentation of issues. See Munson, 467 U.S. at 955, 104 S.Ct. 2839. Pennsylvania Psychiatric Soc. v. Green Spring Health Services, Inc. 280 F.3d 278, C.A.3 (Pa.), (2002). It is clear that JB Hunt does not have standing to challenge jurisdiction in the State of New Jersey. It is possible that Defendant Elmi might be located and properly served at some point in the future and if he is served then he will have standing to challenge jurisdiction. However, at that time, if it ever comes to pass, this office and the Plaintiffs will have the opportunity to provide a showing of minimum contacts with the State of New Jersey. The Plaintiffs should not be compelled to provide such a showing as to Mr. Elmi when he has not

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 4 of 13 Page 4 of 13

even been served with the Complaint. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs hereby request that the Motion for Removal be denied. Plaintiffs request oral argument on this Motion. Respectfully submitted, /s/ George F. Hendricks GEORGE F. HENDRICKS

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 5 of 13 Page 5 of 13

HENDRICKS & HENDRICKS 73 Paterson Street New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901 (732) 828-7800 Attorney for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY YIMIN CHEN and QINGMIAN LI, Plaintiff, vs. HASSAN ABDI ELMI, et al., Defendants. CERTIFICATION OF GEORGE F. HENDRICKS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF OPPOSING CHANGE OF VENUE CIVIL ACTION NO: 2:07-cv-456-KSH

GEORGE F. HENDRICKS, ESQ., of full age, hereby certifies and states as follows: 1. I am an attorney at law of the State of New Jersey and a partner with the law firm of Hendricks & Hendricks, Esqs., attorneys for Plaintiffs, Yimin Chen and Qingmian Li, in the captioned action. I am the attorney in the firm entrusted with the handling of this matter and am fully familiar therewith. 2. 3. 4. This Certification is filed in opposition to Defendant's Motion to Change Venue. This office received a copy of said Motion on April 9, 2007. Defendant Hassan Abdi Elmi is an employee of J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. and, under the doctrine of agency, J.B. Hunt Transport Inc. is responsible for his actions. 5. Hassan Abdi Elmi is apparently no longer a resident of Tennessee and this office is not currently aware of his location. See copy of Affidavit of Services attached as Exhibit A.

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 6 of 13 Page 6 of 13

6.

Defendant J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. is authorized to conduct business in the continental United States and they hold an office in Cranbury, New Jersey (See Exhibit B).

7. 8.

Plaintiffs, Yimin Chen and Qingmian Li, reside within the State of New Jersey. Other than the initial emergency room physicians, all of the plaintiffs' treating physicians are located in and practice medicine within the State of New Jersey.

9.

An additional vehicle involved in this motor vehicle accident was owned by Eric Haug, a potential witness, who also resides within the State of New Jersey.

I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.

HENDRICKS & HENDRICKS, ESQS. Attorneys for Plaintiffs /s/ George F. Hendricks BY:__________________________________ GEORGE F. HENDRICKS, ESQUIRE DATED: April 25, 2007

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 7 of 13 Page 7 of 13

EXHIBIT A

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 8 of 13 Page 8 of 13

Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Document 7

Filed 05/21/2007 Filed 04/25/2007

Page 9 of 13 Page 9 of 13

EXHIBIT B

Layover.com: J.B. Hunt Transport Services Profile Case 1:07-cv-00274-SLR Document 9-14 Case 2:07-cv-00456-KSH-PS Docum