Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Randy Trimble, Plaintiff, vs. Phoenix Police Department, et al., Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CIV 04-0745-PHX-PGR (DKD)

SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY ORDER

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, having filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and defendants1 having answered, IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall comply with the following deadlines and discovery orders: EVENT 1. Last day by which discovery requests may be October 20, 2005 DEADLINE

submitted (discovery request cutoff date): 1.1.

No discovery requests may be submitted after this date except by stipulation of the parties or by Court order for good cause shown.

1.2.

Responses to discovery must be filed within the time provided by the rules unless the parties stipulate otherwise.

Arpaio and Montoya. Document 119 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 1 of 3

Case 2:04-cv-00745-PGR-DKD

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

2.

If defendants desire to take plaintiff's deposition they may do so by November 19, 2005 Leave of Court for the taking of such deposition is granted pursuant to Rule 30(a)(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The deposition may be taken by telephone at the option of defendants.

no later than: 2.1.

3. 4.

Dispositive motion deadline is: Proposed joint pretrial order lodged with the Court by: 4.1.

December 19, 2005 January 18, 2006

Defendants are responsible for initiating the drafting and submission of the proposed pretrial order in the form prescribed by the assigned trial judge.

5.

Limits on discovery. 5.1. Interrogatories: No more than 25 (including subparts) by each party to any other party. 5.2. Requests for production of documents: No more than 15 from each party to any other party. 5.3. 5.4. Requests for admissions: No more than 10 from each party to any other party Depositions: Because of the logistical problems involved, self-represented incarcerated parties may not take depositions without prior Court permission. Such permission will not be granted except upon a showing of exceptional circumstances.

6.

Discovery disputes. 6.1. The Court will not entertain motions to compel discovery, motions for sanctions, motions for protective orders, or the like unless and until there has been compliance with the following procedure: In the event of a dispute over discovery, the parties must confer in good faith, in person or by telephone, and attempt to resolve the dispute. Rule 37(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; LRCiv 7.2(j), Rules of Practice of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. If the dispute remains unresolved, the parties must
-2-

Case 2:04-cv-00745-PGR-DKD

Document 119

Filed 07/22/2005

Page 2 of 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

arrange and participate in a telephonic conference with the undersigned judge prior to bringing any discovery motions. DATED this 22nd day of July, 2005.

-3Case 2:04-cv-00745-PGR-DKD Document 119 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 3 of 3