Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.


April 4, 2005.

DIRECTV, INC., a California Corporation, Plaintiff(s),
ADAM MANDELARO, Defendant(s).

The opinion of the court was delivered by: JONATHAN FELDMAN, Magistrate Judge


Pursuant to the order of the Hon. Charles J. Siragusa referring the above case to the undersigned for pretrial procedures and the entry of a scheduling order as provided in Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 16(b) and Local Rule 16.1(a), the parties are hereby directed to fully comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.

All parties are reminded that effective December 1, 2000, Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was amended. These amendments significantly alter prior discovery practice in the Western District of New York by requiring mandatory pretrial disclosures. The new rules also directly affect the scope and conduct of all discovery in this case.*fn1 All parties are expected be familiar with and fully comply with the requirements of amended Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Based on the foregoing, it is hereby

  ORDERED that each party, including any party appearing without counsel, shall appear before the undersigned on May 4, 2005 at 11:30 a.m., 2330 United States Courthouse, 100 State Street, Rochester, New York for the purpose of entry of a case management order as required by Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and it is further

  ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties shall confer at least 14 days prior to the Rule 16(b) hearing as scheduled above for the purpose of preparing the required "Proposed Discovery Plan" (PDP). The PDP shall be in writing and shall specifically address relevant issues concerning the management of all pretrial discovery practice in this case, including:
1. In his referral order, Judge Siragusa has specifically encouraged the parties to consider the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) governing consent to complete disposition of the case (including trial, if necessary) by this Court. The parties shall state in the PDP whether or not unanimous consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction has been agreed upon.
2. Deadline for compliance with the mandatory disclosure requirements found in Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Any objections to the required disclosures must also be stated in the PDP.
3. Deadline for the filing of motions to amend the pleadings or add parties.
4. Deadline for completion of fact discovery.
5. If expert discovery is contemplated by any party, a deadline for the completion of all expert discovery, including full compliance with Rule 26(a)(2) regarding the identification and filing reports of testifying experts.
6. Deadline for the filing of motions to compel discovery.
7. Any Orders that should be entered under Rule 26(c) (protective/confidentiality orders).
8. Any changes in the limitations on discovery as provided in Rule 30(d)(2) (oral depositions) and Rule 33(a) (interrogatory practice).
9. Deadline for the filing of dispositive motions.
10. The advisability and timing of a judicially supervised settlement conference or other alternative dispute resolution, including mediation.
11. The parties shall advise whether a jury trial is required and the estimated length of the trial.
After meeting, the parties shall prepare a written PDP as required by Rule 26(f) and submit the original PDP report to the Clerk's Office for filing (with a courtesy copy sent directly to Chambers) no later than 4 business days prior to the Rule 16(b) conference as herein scheduled. At the conclusion of the Rule 16(b) conference and after conferring with the parties, this Court will issue a Case Management Order governing all further pretrial proceedings in this action.
ALL OF THE ABOVE IS SO ORDERED. Summary of Rules of Civil Procedure Amendments Effective December 1, 2000
  (1) Changes, effective December 1, 2000, apply to all pending cases and newly filed cases.

  (2) Rule 26(a)(1)(A)-(D) mandates voluntary disclosure of specific categories of information in all cases except those exempted under Rule 26(a)(1)(E), e.g., social security appeals and prisoner civil rights cases, at or within 14 days after the conference between the parties required by Rule 26(f) to develop a written Discovery Plan, unless stipulated or ordered otherwise, or unless a party objects in the Discovery Plan.

  (3) No discovery permitted before parties have conferred to propose a written Discovery Plan unless permitted by court order or by agreement of the parties. Rule 26(d).

  (4) Discovery at the request of a party is limited to a claim or defense. Discovery related to a matter relevant to subject matter of the action available only upon court order for good cause. Rule 26(b)(1).

  (5) Depositions are limited to one day of seven hours. Multiple parties on each side must coordinate depositions unless court authorizes additional deposition time. Rule 30(d)(2).

  (6) Interference with the conduct of a deposition by instructing a witness not to answer a question is sanctionable misconduct unless the instruction is to preserve a privilege or enforce a limitation under Rule 30(d)(4). Rule 30(d)(1) and (3). Objections must be stated concisely and in a non-argumentative and non-suggestive manner. Rule 30(d)(1). UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Western District of New York


  In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), and Fed.R.Civ.P. 73, you are notified that a United States magistrate judge of this district court is available to conduct any or all proceedings in this case including a jury or nonjury trial, and to order the entry of a final judgement. Exercise of this jurisdiction by a magistrate judge is, however, permitted only if all parties voluntarily consent.

  You may, without adverse substantive consequences, withhold your consent, but this will prevent the court's jurisdiction from being exercised by a magistrate judge. If any party withholds consent, the identity of the parties consenting or withholding consent will not be communicated to any ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.