HOCKEY v. WELCH

JOSEPH LAPLANTE, District Judge

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in chambers on March 1, 2010.

Because of the ongoing agreed-to forensic electronic device evaluation, the Discovery Plan (document no. 15) is NOT approved. Instead, the parties will file a new stipulated discovery plan (or request a status conference or other relief) on or before April 15, 2010. When a new plan is filed, it shall include:

• a trial date;

• a summary judgment deadline that precedes the trial date by at least 120 days;

• a discovery completion deadline that precedes the summary judgment deadline; and

• a "DiBennedetto" disclosure deadline. Summary Judgment. The parties and counsel are advised that compliance with Rule 56(e) and Local Rule 7.2(b), regarding evidentiary support for factual assertions, and specification and delineation of material issues of disputed fact, will be required.

Discovery disputes. Discovery disputes will be handled by the undersigned judge, as opposed to the Magistrate Judge, in the normal course. No motion to compel is necessary. The party or counsel seeking discovery-related relief should confer with adverse counsel to choose mutually available dates, and then contact the Deputy Clerk to schedule a conference call with the court. The court will inform counsel and parties what written materials, if any, should be submitted in advance of the conference call.

Customary motions to compel discovery, while disfavored by the undersigned judge, are nonetheless permissible. If counsel prefer traditional discovery litigation to the conference call procedure set forth above, any such motion to compel should expressly request, in the title of the motion, a referral to the United States Magistrate Judge. Such referral requests will normally be granted. If the Magistrate Judge is recused, alternate arrangements will be made.