From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mankes v. Seattle Systems, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Tacoma
Jan 15, 2003
No. C03-5013FDB (W.D. Wash. Jan. 15, 2003)

Opinion

No. C03-5013FDB

January 15, 2003


ORDER REQUIRING INITIAL DISCLOSURES AND JOINT STATUS REPORT


It is ORDERED that

Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the deadline for FRCP 26(f) Conference April 18, 2003, Initial Disclosures pursuant to FRCP26(a) by May 2, 2003 The pates are directed I confer and provide the Court with a combined Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan not later than May 9, 2003 FILING DEADLINES MEAN THE DATE ITEMS ARE TO BE FILED IN TACOMA The Joint Status Report shall contain the following information

1 What is the statutory jurisdictional basis for this Court's jurisdiction?
a Concisely state the facts underlying the asserted basis for this Court jurisdiction
b If a corporation is a party, name the state by which it was incorporated, and S forth facts demonstrating the corporation's principal place of business
2 Is there any other jurisdiction where this cause of action might have been brought? If s why is the Western District of Washington the preferred place of filing?

3 What is the nature and complexity of the case?

4 What is the status of the case including hearings, motions, and discovery?
5 Should this case or portions of it be referred to a Special Master pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 53?
6 Is this case appropriate for mediation under Local Rule 39 1? If no explain
7 Do the parties agree to consent that a full-time magistrate judge may conduct a proceedings including trial under Local Rule MJR 13?
8 On what date will the case be ready for trial, considering Local Rule 16 deadlines?

9 Is the trial to be jury or non-jury?

10 The number of trial days required?

11 The names, addresses and telephone numbers of trial counsel?

12 The dates on which trial counsel are unavailable and any other complications to be considered in setting a trial date?

13 Suggestions for shortening or simplifying trial

14 Should the case be bifurcated, trying liability issues before damages issues, or bifurcated in any other way?

It is the responsibility of the Plaintiffs counsel to serve a copy of this order upon all parties who may appear after this Order is filed within ten (10) days of receipt of service of an appearance. It is also the responsibility of Plaintiffs counsel to initiate the communication necessary to prepare this Joint Status Report

If counsel are unable to agree upon the content of any part of the status report, they may respond in separate paragraphs. Separate status reports are not to be filed.

If on the due date of the Joint Status Report, all defendant(s) or respondent(s) have not been served, counsel for the plaintiff shall advise the Court in an independent status report when service will be effected and why service has not been previously accomplished

If on the due date the defendant(s) or respondent(s) have been served and no answer or appearance has been filed, counsel for the plaintiff shall file an independent status report setting for the above information in items 1 through 10 to the extent possible This report shall also include the current status of the non-appearing parties.

Failure to respond to this Order pursuant to its terms may result in the impositions of sanction by the Court The Clerk of this Court is instructed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counts of record


Summaries of

Mankes v. Seattle Systems, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Tacoma
Jan 15, 2003
No. C03-5013FDB (W.D. Wash. Jan. 15, 2003)
Case details for

Mankes v. Seattle Systems, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JUDITH M MANKES, Plaintiff, v. SEATTLE SYSTEMS, INC., a corporation…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Tacoma

Date published: Jan 15, 2003

Citations

No. C03-5013FDB (W.D. Wash. Jan. 15, 2003)