From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Directv, Inc. v. Wing

United States District Court, D. Idaho
Sep 29, 2003
Case No. CV 03-396-S-LMB (D. Idaho Sep. 29, 2003)

Opinion

Case No. CV 03-396-S-LMB

September 29, 2003


ORDER


Pursuant to District of Idaho Local Civil Rule 16.1, at least twenty-one (21) days prior to a scheduling conference, the parties shall confer and discuss the items contained in the Scheduling Conference Form/Litigation Plan (see attached).

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and Local Rule 16.1, fourteen (14) days after the parties have conferred on the Scheduling Conference Form/Litigation Plan, the parties must make their initial disclosures.

In addition, prior to a scheduling conference, the parties must advise the Court in writing if they wish to proceed before a Magistrate Judge by signing and returning the Notice of Availability of a United States Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction and Requirement for Consent (see attached). If a party does not wish to proceed before a Magistrate Judge, they must advise the Clerk of Court in writing and this matter will then be reassigned to a District Judge,

THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The parties shall confer and discuss the items contained in the Scheduling Conference Form/Litigation Plan as set forth in the Local Rules and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and shall file the Litigation Plan with the Clerk of Court.

2. The panics shall determine if this matter shall proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge or if they wish to request reassignment by either returning the Notice of Availability or requesting in writing that this matter be reassigned,

3. After the Litigation Plan and consent decisions have been filed with the Clerk of Court, Plaintiff(s) shall be responsible for contacting Lynette Case, Judge Boyle's courtroom deputy, at (208)334-9023, for the purpose of setting a scheduling conference. A scheduling conference will not be set until after the Litigation Plan and consent forms have been filed with the Clerk of Court. It shall be Plaintiffs responsibility to ensure that the Litigation Plan and consent forms have been filed with the Court prior to requesting a scheduling conference.

4. In the event the Litigation Plan and consent decisions have not been filed within ninety (90) days of the date of this Order . Plaintiff(s) shall submit a written report advising the Court of the status of this matter.

5. Plaintiffs) shall be responsible for serving this Order on any party not represented on the attached Clerk's Certificate of Mailing,

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE FORM/LITIGATION PLAN

PROPOSED DATES proposed

CASE #:_________________________________ NATURE OF SUIT:______________________ CASE NAME:____________________________________________________________________ ASSIGNED JUDGE: United States Magistrate Judge Larry M. Boyle__________________ PARTY BEING REPRESENTED:_______________________________________________________ plaintiff defendant 0 parties have stipulated to the following dates PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY:__________________________________ ADDRESS:_______________________________________________ TELEPHONE:_____________________________________________ DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY:__________________________________ ADDRESS:_______________________________________________ TELEPHONE:_____________________________________________ : 1. JOINDER OF PARTIES/AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS:_________________________________ 2. EXPERT TESTIMONY DISCLOSURES: (Local Rule 26.2(b)) Plaintiff identify and disclose expert reports by:________________________ Defendant identity and disclose expert reports by:____________________________ All discovery relevant to experts shall be completed by:______________________ 3. FACTUAL DISCOVERY CUT-OFF DATE: (150 days prior to trial):_________________ 4. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS FILING CUT-OFF DATE: (120 days prior to trial)_________ 5. ESTIMATED LENGTH OF TRIAL:_________________________________________________ Jury Court 6. TRIAL DATE:________________________________________________________________ (Enter trial date(s) — actual trial date will be determined by the Court at the scheduling conference.) ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION OPTIONS — (CHECK PREFERENCE) MEDIATION (General Order No. 130) (Local Rule 16.5) ARBITRATION (General Order No, 92) (Local Rule 16,5) SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE (Local Rule 16.4)

This Scheduling Conference/Litigation Form is to be filled out and filed with the Court prior to the scheduling conference.


In accordance with United Stales District Court for the District of Idaho General Order #159, and Fed.R.Civ.P. 73, you arc notified that a United States Magistrate Judge of this district Court is available to conduct any or all proceedings in Ibis case, including a jury or nonjury trial, and to order the entry of a final judgment. Exercise of this jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge is available only if all parties file a written consent, a coy of which is included in this notice.

You may without adverse substantive consequences withhold your consent. No judge shall be informed of a party's response to the clerk's notification, unless all parties have consented to the referral of the matter to a United States Magistrate Judge, The decision of the parties shall be communicated to the Clerk of Court.

An appeal from a judgment entered by a United States Magistrate Judge will be directly to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the same manner as an appeal from any other judgment of this district. 2S U.S.C. 636(c); Fed.R.Civ.P. 73.

If you wish to consent to this matter being handled by a United States Magistrate Judge, please sign this form and return it to the address at the bottom of this form. If all parties do not consent to the exercise of jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge prior to the Rule 16,1 Scheduling Conference, this matter will not be reassigned.

NOTE: All consents and requests for reassignment should be sent to: Jeanie Loera, Deputy Clerk, U.S. District Court, 550 West Fort Street, Boise, ID 83724.

CONSENT TO THE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY A UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

In accordance with provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 73, the parties in this case consent to have a United Stales Magistrate Judge conduct any and all proceedings in this case including the trial, order the entry of a final judgment, and conduct all post-judgment proceedings.


Summaries of

Directv, Inc. v. Wing

United States District Court, D. Idaho
Sep 29, 2003
Case No. CV 03-396-S-LMB (D. Idaho Sep. 29, 2003)
Case details for

Directv, Inc. v. Wing

Case Details

Full title:DIRECTV, INC., Plaintiffs, v. CHRIS WING, Defendant(s)

Court:United States District Court, D. Idaho

Date published: Sep 29, 2003

Citations

Case No. CV 03-396-S-LMB (D. Idaho Sep. 29, 2003)