Free Scheduling Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) JOSEPH ARPAIO, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________) NATHANIEL HEARNS,

CIV 03-1924 PHX MHM (MEA) ORDER

This is a civil rights action filed by a individual who
15

is incarcerated and who is without counsel.
16 17

Therefore, this

case is exempted from the requirements of Rule 26(f), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires the parties to file a
18

Rule 26(f) statement prior to the issuance of a scheduling
19

order.
20

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) (2006). disclosure is required in actions

Additionally, no brought without

initial
21 22

counsel by a person in the custody of a state or a state subdivision.
23 24

See

Fed.

R.

Civ.

P.

26(a)(1)(E))

(2006).

Therefore, the Court will not require the parties to submit an initial disclosure statement.
25

The parties are put on notice that the following
26

schedule shall not be modified except upon a showing of good
27

cause and by leave of court.
28

Case 2:03-cv-01924-MHM-MEA

Document 22

Filed 06/13/2006

Page 1 of 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 ORDERED that: 1. All requests for discovery shall be served by September 22, 2006. 2. All motions regarding discovery shall be filed by October 27, 2006. 3. All motions to join parties or to further amend pleadings shall be filed by August 25, 2006. 4. All dispositive motions shall be filed by December 1, 2006. 5. All other pretrial motions, other than motions in limine, shall be filed by January 5, 2007. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant may take

Plaintiff's deposition, if he chooses, no later than August 18, 2006. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall lodge a joint pretrial statement and proposed order, on or before January 5, 2007, or in the event one or more dispositive motions is filed, within 90 days of the court's ruling on the last dispositive motion that does not dispose of the case.

Defendants are responsible for initiating the drafting and submission of the proposed pretrial order in the form prescribed by the assigned trial judge. DATED this 12th day of June, 2006.

-2Case 2:03-cv-01924-MHM-MEA Document 22 Filed 06/13/2006 Page 2 of 2