Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 270

Filed 01/04/2005

Page 1 of 3

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
____________________________________ ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) PRECISION PINE & TIMBER, INC., ORDER Pursuant to the Court's Order dated November 2, 2004, the parties appeared for a scheduling conference on January 4, 2005. The Court had before it "Defendant's Status Report," filed January 3, 2005, which set forth the parties' differing proposed schedules for pretrial activities. At the scheduling conference, plaintiff submitted a revised proposed pretrial schedule. Having considered the parties' written proposals and the oral argument of counsel at the status conference, the Court adopts the following pretrial schedule in this action: 1) Parties exchange preliminary witness lists in accordance with Appendix A ¶13b: Monday, January 31, 2005. Plaintiff produces expert report on post-suspension harvesting: Monday, February 7, 2005. Parties exchange preliminary exhibit lists in accordance with Appendix A ¶13a: Monday, February 21, 2005. Parties meet in accordance with Appendix A ¶13c; defendant responds to plaintiff's proposed stipulations of fact: Monday, February 28, 2005. Defendant's deadline for conducting deposition of plaintiff's expert: Monday, February 28, 2005. Parties file joint stipulations of fact: Wednesday, March 2, 2005.

No. 98-720 C

Filed January 4, 2005

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

-1-

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 270

Filed 01/04/2005

Page 2 of 3

7)

Plaintiff files Memorandum of Facts and Law (App. A ¶14a), Final Witness List (App. A ¶15), and Final Exhibit List (App. A ¶16): Monday, March 7, 2005. Defendant's deadline for conducting additional discovery related to the content of the report of plaintiff's expert and for submitting rebuttal report, if any, of defendant's expert: Monday, March 21, 2005. Defendant files Memorandum of Facts and Law (App. A. ¶14b), Final Witness List (App. A ¶15), and Final Exhibit List (App. A ¶16): Monday, April 4, 2005. Plaintiff"s deadline for conducting deposition of defendant's rebuttal expert: Monday, April 11, 2005. Parties file motions in limine as to witnesses, objections to exhibits, and stipulations as to admissibility of exhibits: Monday, April 18, 2005. Parties file responses to motions in limine and responses to objections to exhibits: Thursday, April 28, 2005. Pretrial Conference: Thursday, May 5, 2005, 10 a.m. at the National Courts Building, 717 Madison Pl., NW, Washington, D.C. Trial: To commence on Thursday, May 12, 2005, 9:15 a.m. at the National Courts Building, 717 Madison Pl., NW, Washington, D.C.

8)

9)

10)

11)

12)

13)

14)

The parties shall be allowed to add exhibits to their preliminary exhibit lists up and until the filing of final pretrial exhibit lists, without the need to show a compelling reason for the earlier omission, provided that the existence or relevance of such added exhibits reasonably became known as a result of the expert reports and related discovery relating to post-suspension harvesting. Other exhibits may be added upon a showing of a compelling reason for the earlier omission. In addition, the parties shall be allowed to identify their expert witnesses on postsuspension harvesting on their final witness lists without the need to show a compelling reason for not having identified such expert witnesses in their preliminary witness lists. With respect to the location of the trial, the Court is not persuaded that the interests of justice, considerations of judicial economy, and the convenience of the witnesses support the conclusion that, as plaintiff has suggested, some portion of the trial should be conducted in Arizona. On balance, the Court is of the view, which the Court understands to be the position of the defendant, that those factors would best be served if the entire trial were conducted in Washington, D.C. -2-

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 270

Filed 01/04/2005

Page 3 of 3

Plaintiff's pending motion in limine, filed August 12, 2004, seeking to exclude the report, testimony, and declaration of defendant's putative expert witness, Charles P. Adkins, will be briefed and resolved in accordance with the schedule set forth above.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ George W. Miller GEORGE W. MILLER Judge

-3-