From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sanai v. Cobrae

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 26, 2022
2:22-cv-0528-KJM-CKD (PS) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-0528-KJM-CKD (PS)

10-26-2022

CYRUS SANAI, Plaintiff, v. DARREN COBRAE, Defendant.


ORDER

CAROLYN K. DELANEY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, an attorney, seeks relief under 9 U.S.C. § 10 against defendant, a former client. (See generally, ECF No. 1, Complaint.) Defendant has appeared and proceeds pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Defendant filed an answer to the complaint. (ECF No. 13.) Within 30 days from the date of this order, if they have not already done so, the parties shall meet, in person or by telephone, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. Within 7 days after the parties' Rule 26 discussion, the parties shall file a Joint Status Report and Request for Hearing before the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of entry of a pretrial scheduling order. The joint status report shall address the relevant portions of Local Rule 240(a).

If the parties are unable to file a joint status report, they may file separate status reports.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. If the parties have not already done so, within 30 days from the date of this order, the parties shall meet, in person or by telephone, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.

2. Within 7 days after the parties' Rule 26 discussion, the parties shall file a joint status report and request for hearing before the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of entry of a pretrial scheduling order. The report shall address the following matters:

a. Service of process;
b. Possible joinder of additional parties;
c. Any expected or desired amendment of the pleadings;
d. Jurisdiction and venue;
e. Anticipated motions and their scheduling;
f. The report required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 outlining the proposed discovery plan and its scheduling, including disclosure of expert witnesses;
g. Future proceedings, including setting appropriate cut-off dates for discovery and law and motion, and the scheduling of a pretrial conference and trial;
h. Special procedures, if any;
i. Estimated trial time;
j. Modification of standard pretrial procedures specified by the rules due to the simplicity or complexity of the proceedings;
k. Whether the case is related to any other cases, including bankruptcy;
l. Whether a settlement conference should be scheduled;
m. Whether counsel will stipulate to the magistrate judge assigned to this matter acting as settlement judge and waiving disqualification by virtue of her so acting, or whether they prefer to have a settlement conference before another judge;
n. Any other matters that may add to the just and expeditious disposition of this matter.


Summaries of

Sanai v. Cobrae

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 26, 2022
2:22-cv-0528-KJM-CKD (PS) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2022)
Case details for

Sanai v. Cobrae

Case Details

Full title:CYRUS SANAI, Plaintiff, v. DARREN COBRAE, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Oct 26, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-0528-KJM-CKD (PS) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2022)