Case 6:01-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 01/12/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Similar documents
Case 3:16-cv CRS-CHL Document 36 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 423

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) UNIFORM SCHEDULING ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

Case 9:01-cv MHS-KFG Document 72 Filed 08/16/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1935

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NOS.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 5:14-cv JRA Doc #: 29 Filed: 01/28/15 1 of 6. PageID #: 284 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:15-cv LTS Document 29 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 7

MONTANA UNIFORM DISTRICT COURT RULES

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS BELMONT COUNTY, OHIO. : Plaintiff : vs. : FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER : Case No. Defendant :

LOCAL RULES OF THE DISTRICT COURT. [Adapted from the Local Rules for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DOCKET CONTROL ORDER STEP ACTION RULE DATE DUE 1

FORM 4. RULE 26(f) REPORT (PATENT CASES) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Initial Pre-hearing Arbitration Scheduling Order. Parties

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NOS.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PATENT CASE SCHEDULE. Answer or Other Response to Complaint 5 weeks

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL JURY TRIALS BEFORE DISTRICT JUDGE JON S.

NO. V. AT LAW NO. 1. Defendant(s). ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS. FINAL PRETRIAL SUBMISSION (CPS Trial)

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF JACKSON BUSINESS COURT DIVISION. via telephone (check one) /

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITY CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER

Case 2:16-cv JAK-AS Document 29 Filed 10/15/16 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:190

NO. V. AT LAW NO. 1. Defendant(s). ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS. FINAL PRETRIAL SUBMISSION [Required For Bench Trials over two (2) hours]

Case 4:04-cv RAS Document 41 Filed 12/09/2004 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

These rules shall be known as the Local Rules for Columbia and Montour Counties, the 26 th Judicial District, and shall be cited as L.R. No.

Judicial Practice Preferences Circuit Civil/Section 11

Case 2:18-cv KOB Document 49 Filed 02/12/19 Page 1 of 7

LOCAL SMITH COUNTY RULES OF CIVIL TRIAL JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURTS AND COUNTY COURTS AT LAW SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

Case 5:16-cv CAR Document 19 Filed 05/25/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

Cislo & Thomas LLP Litigation Cost Control (LCC ) Stages of Litigation and Expected Fees and Costs

Case 1:08-cv EGS Document 19 Filed 12/12/08 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

RULES OF TENNESSEE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION CHAPTER PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - CONTESTED CASES TABLE OF CONTENTS

being preempted by the court's criminal calendar.

HAWAII ADMINISTRATIVE RULES TITLE 12 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SUBTITLE 7 BOARDS CHAPTER 47

RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF PUYALLUP, WASHINGTON CHAPTER I: HEARINGS ON PERMIT APPLICATIONS

UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT. 16 AMERICA UNITES FOR KIDS, et al., CASE NO. 2:15-cv PA-AJW

CONTENTS OF PROPOSED TIME CALCULATION CHANGES TO COLORADO RULES COLORADO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE (RULES 1-122). 2

TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER n: DISPUTE RESOLUTION

RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 5:5. PRETRIAL PROCEDURES AND PROCEDURES RELATING TO CERTAIN JUDGMENTS

ORDER SETTING TRIAL AND DIRECTING PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURE. It appearing that this case is at issue and can be set for trial, it is ORDERED as follows:

INDIVIDUAL RULES AND PROCEDURES JUDGE SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN

THE COLORADO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR COURTS OF RECORD IN COLORADO CHAPTER 10 GENERAL PROVISIONS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CONSOLIDATED LITIGATION NO.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND R U L E S O R D E R. This Court s Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and

1. CIVIL RULES GENERAL PROVISIONS ADMINISTRATION OF CIVIL LITIGATION MARIN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT - UNIFORM LOCAL RULES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN DIVISION

RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT

LEWIS A. KAPLAN United States District Judge United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007

Rules of the Equal Opportunities Commission November 10, 2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendant/s.

ADAMS COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BUSINESS OF COURTS

ADR CODE OF PROCEDURE

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT LAW DIVISION JUDGE RAYMOND W. MITCHELL STANDING ORDER.

Case 2:05-cv TJW Document 211 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs,

INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

COURT RULES OF THE HONORABLE RICHARD MOTT, J.S.C. 401 Union Street Columbia County Courthouse (Temporary)

RULES OF THE TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER MEDIATION AND HEARING PROCEDURES TABLE OF CONTENTS

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL CIVIL DIVISION

9:30 a.m. MOTION CALL, CASE MANAGEMENT, STATUS DATES 10:00 a.m. 2:30 p.m. MATTERS SET BY THE COURT

Filed & Entered: 03/14/2016

Third, it should provide for the orderly admission of evidence.

17B-005. Civil injunction proceedings. A. Petition for civil injunction. If chief disciplinary counsel or, when necessary, chief disciplinary counsel

Case 1:13-cv WYD-MEH Document 28 Filed 02/20/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Case: 2:15-cv MHW-NMK Doc #: 20 Filed: 07/01/15 Page: 1 of 10 PAGEID #: 143

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA. vs. Case No: ORDER ESTABLISHING MOTION PRACTICE PROCEDURE

vs. OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS DISCOVERY AND DOCKET CONTROL PLAN FOR LEVEL 3 CASE ( PLAN )

Mastering Civil Procedure Checklist

REVISED AS OF MARCH 2014

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

Case 5:18-cv DAE Document 9 Filed 08/01/18 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:05-cv TJW Document 212 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT CHANCERY DIVISION CALENDAR 7 COURTROOM 2405 JUDGE DIANE J. LARSEN STANDING ORDER 2.

RULE 19 APPEALS TO THE CAREER SERVICE HEARING OFFICE (Effective January 10, 2018; Rule Revision Memo 33D)

THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO PRETRIAL ORDERS

RULES OF PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COWLITZ COUNTY HEARINGS EXAMINER

DISCOVERY- LOCAL RULES JUSTICE COURTS OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS

TITLE 2 PROCEDURAL RULE BOARD OF ARCHITECTS SERIES 2 DISCIPLINARY AND COMPLAINT PROCEDURES FOR ARCHITECTS

CASE NUMBER: DIV 71. It appearing that this case is at issue and can be set for trial, it is ORDERED as follows:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION. Plaintiffs, Defendant.

Vague and Ambiguous. The terms market and marketing are not defined.as such, the

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNIFORM PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER. Civil No. 1:13-CV-1211 vs. GLS/TWD Andrew Cuomo, et al.

Civil Litigation Forms Library

State of Wyoming Office of Administrative Hearings

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. JOINT RULE 26(f) PRETRIAL REPORT vs.

APG ASBESTOS TRUST. 1. A copy of these ADR Procedures; 2. Form Affidavit of Completeness; 3. Election Form and Agreement for Binding Arbitration; and

INDIVIDUAL PRACTICES IN CIVIL CASES Nelson S. Román, United States District Judge. Courtroom Deputy Clerk

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DISTRICT JUDGE EDWARD J. DAVILA STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES

RULES OF THE TENNESSEE CLAIMS COMMISSION CHAPTER RULES OF PROCEDURE TABLE OF CONTENTS

Case 1:12-md JG-VVP Document 273 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 4938 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case: 2:06-cv ALM-TPK Doc #: 460 Filed: 09/25/15 Page: 1 of 12 PAGEID #: 15864

JUSTICE JEFFREY K. OING PART 48 PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES

UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING PRETRIAL MATTERS TO BE COMPLETED

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA

PRETRIAL ORDER (JURY TRIALS)

Transcription:

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and STATE OF NEW MEXICO ex rel. STATE ENGINEER, No. 01cv00072-MV/WPL Plaintiffs, ZUNI RIVER BASIN ADJUDICATION -v- A & R PRODUCTIONS, et. al., Subfile No. ZRB-2-0038 Defendants. JOINT STATUS REPORT AND PROPOSED DISCOVERY PLAN Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f, counsel for Plaintiff United States of America and Plaintiff State of New Mexico ( Plaintiffs were able to consult with Defendants Craig and Regina Fredrickson ( Defendants. The Parties have been able to arrive at this Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan. The Parties differ only with respect to two points as stated at pages 5 and 7 below. The Parties present to the Court this Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan that they have prepared, request that the Court resolve the Parties differences, and request that the Court issue a Case Management Order that is consistent with this Plan and its decisions. NATURE OF THE CASE A determination of Defendants water rights for real property owned by Defendants in this general stream system water rights adjudication. Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 1 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 2 of 9 AMENDMENTS TO PLEADINGS AND JOINDER OF PARTIES Plaintiffs do not intend to file any additional pleadings or join additional parties to this subfile action. STIPULATIONS The Parties stipulate that venue is proper in this District and that the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico has jurisdiction of the Parties and the subject matter. The Parties further stipulate that the substantive law governing this case is the law of the State of New Mexico. The Parties stipulate that the water right for the single well in dispute (designated 10A-5- W06 in the Hydrographic Survey is made up of two components: a domestic use component and a livestock use component no other historic beneficial uses are claimed that might form the basis for a water right. The Parties further stipulate that no dispute exists between them concerning the domestic use component of the water right. The Parties stipulate that the domestic use component of the water right from the well are as follows: priority December 31, 1955; amount 0.7 AFY; historic beneficial use Domestic purposes; periods of use January 1 December 31; and place of use existing, single family home located near the well. PLAINTIFFS CONTENTIONS The Plaintiffs contend that the Defendants are entitled to a livestock use component of the water right from well 10A-5-W06 only to the extent that they are recognized by Plaintiffs in Attachment 1. 1 The Subfile Answer (Doc. 3161 reflects that Defendants do not agree with 1 As stated in Attachment 1, the water quantity associated with well 10A-5-W06 includes a 0.7 AFY quantity associated with the domestic use component to which the Parties stipulate (as described above. Plaintiffs do not stipulate to any fact associated with a livestock use Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 2 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 3 of 9 Plaintiffs. As such, Defendants are required to establish each element of a livestock use component: priority, amount, beneficial use, periods of use, and place of use. DEFENDANTS CONTENTIONS Defendants contend that they are entitled to a livestock use component from well 10A-5- W06 that is different from and greater in quantity than that offered by Plaintiffs. Defendants identified the specific issues and areas of disagreement regarding the livestock use component in their Subfile Answer (Doc. 3161. DISCOVERY PLAN Discovery is necessary and should be centered on that material which is relevant to establish or dispel Defendants contentions. Discovery should begin once the Court issues a Case Management Order adopting the provisions of this Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan and resolving the Parties remaining differences. The Parties propose the discovery plan outlined in the paragraphs below. 1. The Defendants have the burden to establish all elements of water rights that they assert: the priority, amount, beneficial use, periods of use, and place of use. As such, in any proceeding or trial before the Court, Defendants will first call witnesses to support their claims for water rights asserted in their Subfile Answer (Doc. 3161. Defendants shall disclose to Plaintiffs within 30 days from the issuance of the Court s component. The nature and extent of the total water rights to which Plaintiffs are willing to agree are stated in Attachment 1 titled US/NM Recognized Water Right. Until final judgment is entered, Plaintiffs do not intend to withdraw their settlement offer concerning the livestock use component. Nevertheless, Plaintiffs settlement offer is revocable by Plaintiffs at any time and for any reason and Plaintiffs reserve the right to modify their livestock use component settlement offer at any time for any reason. Plaintiffs will notify the Court and Defendants in the event Plaintiffs change their position on their standing settlement offer. Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 3 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 4 of 9 Case Management Order the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any witness that they intend to call and shall disclose whether the person identified will be a lay or expert witness. 2. After the Defendants have presented their testimony and evidence, Plaintiffs may call the following person as a rebuttal witness: i. Scott Turnbull, P.E., Associate Engineer, Natural Resources Consulting Engineers, Inc., 131 Lincoln Ave., Ste. 300, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 (970 224-1851, and ii. Rebuttal witness(es to any additional expert(s identified by Defendants (identity to be provided no later than thirty days from the date of disclosure by Defendants of any additional witness(es. 3. The Parties may also call witnesses yet to be named to identify or authenticate documents, if necessary. 4. Within 30 days from the issuance of the Court s Case Management Order, the Parties shall exchange Initial Disclosure materials as described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a(1. Included in Initial Disclosures, Defendants will provide Plaintiffs copies of all documentary evidence in their possession that they intend to present to the Court to support their claimed livestock use component water right. Although Plaintiffs have no initial burden of proof, Plaintiffs shall have an ongoing obligation to disclose during discovery any documentary evidence that they intend to introduce to rebut Defendants evidence and such evidence shall be disclosed 30 days before the close of discovery. Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 4 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 5 of 9 5. Discovery will be needed on the following subjects: the livestock use component water right elements (the priority, amount, historic beneficial use, periods of use, and place of use as claimed by Defendants in their Subfile Answer (Doc. 3161. The following procedures shall govern discovery associated with this subfile action. Discovery is limited to those factual matters associated with establishing the elements for Defendants claimed, contested livestock use component water right based on prior beneficial use. a. (PLAINTIFFS CONTENTION Maximum of 25 interrogatories (including any subparts (responses due 30 days after service. (DEFENDANTS CONTENTION Maximum of 50 interrogatories (including any subparts (responses due 30 days after service. b. Maximum of 25 requests for production of documents (responses due 30 days after service. Copies of documents may be produced in either paper or electronic PDF format at the discretion of the disclosing party. c. (PLAINTIFFS CONTENTION Maximum of 25 requests for admission (responses due 30 days after service. (DEFENDANTS CONTENTION Maximum of 50 requests for admission (responses due 30 days after service. d. Once discovery begins, each party is permitted to depose the other Parties (or party representatives and the identified witness(es of the other party. Each deposition shall be arranged through the consent of all Parties to the subfile proceeding. Each deposition is limited to a maximum of 4 hours unless extended by agreement of the Parties and shall occur at the location of the Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 5 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 6 of 9 witness principle place of work unless otherwise agreed to by all Parties. Costs associated with the deposition shall be borne by the party taking the deposition except that costs associated with the deposed witnesses (fees, travel expenses, etc. shall be borne by the party on whose behalf the witness is to be called. e. As contemplated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a(2, if Defendants intend to call an expert witness of any kind, that expert will be identified no later than 30 days from the issuance of the Court s Case Management Order. At this time, Defendants anticipate that they will call Defendant Craig Fredrickson as an expert witness. Every expert witness, including Mr. Fredrickson, must prepare and produce a complete, final written expert report to Plaintiffs no later than 60 days from the issuance of the Court s Case Management Order. The expert report of any expert witness of Defendants, including Mr. Fredrickson s, shall include every expert opinion (and the complete basis thereof held by the expert to which he/she may give testimony. f. As contemplated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a(2, Plaintiffs will prepare and produce a written expert report from Mr. Turnbull (or another appropriate expert identified by Plaintiffs to rebut the opinion of any expert witness retained by Defendants. If Defendants do not produce a written expert report, Plaintiffs will nevertheless prepare a written expert report from Mr. Trumbull that established the factual basis for the livestock use component water right described in Attachment 1. Plaintiffs shall have 45 days from the day Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 6 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 7 of 9 Defendants provide their expert report(s to produce Plaintiffs expert report(s. g. Supplementation under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e is due 20 days after the new information has been acquired. h. (PLAINTIFFS CONTENTION All discovery commenced must be completed by 120 days after the issuance of the Court s Case Management Order. (DEFENDANTS CONTENTION All discovery commenced must be completed by 180 days after the issuance of the Court s Case Management Order. Any interrogatories, requests for admission, and requests for production must be submitted no later than 30 days before the discovery completion date described here. No deposition may be held beyond the (PLAINTIFFS CONTENTION 120-day (DEFENDANTS CONTENTION 180-day discovery period without the consent of either the opposing Parties or the Court. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS The Parties anticipate that the Parties may file motions for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 in an attempt to resolve those issues that do not have a material issue of fact in dispute. The Parties should submit motions for summary judgment under the following schedule: 1. Within 30 days after the close of discovery, Defendants shall submit any motion for summary judgment they think appropriate to establish some or all of the water rights in excess of those rights recognized by Plaintiffs. Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 7 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 8 of 9 2. Within 60 days from the close of discovery, Plaintiffs shall submit a combined brief that contains A any response they might have to Defendants motion for summary judgment and B any cross-motion for summary judgment on those water rights attributes claimed in addition to those that Plaintiffs are willing to recognize. Plaintiffs shall be permitted to submit a single combined brief not to exceed fifty-four (54 double spaced pages (not inclusive of necessary appendices or attachments. 3. Within 75 days from the close of discovery, Defendants shall submit a combined brief that contains 1 any reply they might have to Plaintiffs response to Defendants motion for summary judgment and 2 any response on Plaintiffs cross-motion for summary judgment. Defendants shall be permitted to submit a single combined brief not to exceed forty-eight (48 double spaced pages (not inclusive of necessary appendices or attachments. 4. Plaintiffs shall file a final reply on Defendants response to the Plaintiffs crossmotion for summary judgment within 90 days from the close of discovery. Plaintiffs shall be permitted to submit a single combined brief not to exceed twenty (20 double spaced pages (not inclusive of necessary appendices or attachments. 5. No oral argument will be permitted on any motion for summary judgment without a party requesting permission for oral argument from the Court and establishing good cause for the need for such oral argument. TRIAL To the extent that an issue of material fact remains after dispositive motions that requires the Court to conduct an evidentiary trial, Plaintiffs estimate that any trial would require 1 day. Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 8 of 9

Case 6:01-cv-00072-MV-WPL Document 3167-1 Filed 01/12/16 Page 9 of 9 This is a non-jury case and should be scheduled only after dispositive motions have been addressed and resolved. The Court shall schedule a final pretrial conference as contemplated by Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(e and shall subsequently issue a final trial plan for the Parties to follow. SETTLEMENT The possibility of settlement in this case is not considered likely. Plaintiffs do not request a settlement conference. As stated above unless otherwise notified, Plaintiffs settlement offer will remain in place until either the Court enters judgment on this matter or the Plaintiffs give notice that they withdraw their offer. Submitted this 12th day of January, 2016. Attachment A - Joint Status Report and Proposed Discovery Plan Page 9 of 9