Opinion
Case No. 08-2490-KHV.
December 17, 2008
ORDER
On November 25, 2008, the court entered the Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling (doc. 15) which, in part, set the Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(1) scheduling conferencing for December 30, 2008, by telephone conference call. The order specifically provided that by December 10, 2008, the parties were to "confer to discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses, to discuss the use of mediation or other methods of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), to develop a proposed discovery plan, and to make or arrange for the disclosures required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1)." The order further provided that "[b]y December 19, 2008, defendant shall submit a completed report of the parties' planning conference to the undersigned magistrate judge." On December 16, 2008, the court received an email from pro se plaintiff, Philip N. Jaax, regarding an extension of the deadline for the parties to conduct their Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference. An email was subsequently sent to defendants' counsel by court staff inquiring as to whether defendants opposed plaintiff's proposed extension. This prompted a flurry of emails from both sides. Rather than spend any time commenting on the various accusations contained in the emails, the court denies plaintiff's informal request for extension and orders as follows:
a. The scheduling conference set for December 30, 2008, by telephone conference call will instead by held at 10:00 a.m. in the U.S. Courthouse, Room 236, 500 State Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas, before the undersigned magistrate judge, Hon. James P. O'Hara.
b. The court vacates its prior order requiring that the parties confer and that defendants submit the completed report of the parties' planning conference. Rather, the court will address the issues regarding planning and scheduling during the conference.
IT IS SO ORDERED.