Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:20-cv-01101_de20> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 4 of
4
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:20-cv-01101_de20 RegisterActionDate "2020-05-21" @default.
- ilnd;;1:20-cv-01101_de20 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the Joint Initial Status Report (Dckt. No. 19 ). The section about subject matter jurisdiction required a little digging by the Court. The caption of the Joint Initial Status Report lists "Swift Transportation, Inc." as a party. When discussing the basis for subject matter jurisdiction, the report once against identifies "Swift Transportation, Inc.," leading the Court to believe that it was a party at the time of removal, but then the report cryptically says "Dismissed." That led the Court to wonder when, and by whom? The Notice of Removal also includes "Swift Transportation, Inc." in the caption, and paragraph five referred to "Defendant Swift Transportation, Inc." The caption and that text once again gave the impression that Swift Transportation, Inc. was a party at the time of removal, and thus that its citizenship would count for diversity purposes. But a few pages later, the Notice of Removal states that Swift Transportation, Inc. was dismissed from the state court case on February 6, 2020, and that the remaining defendants removed this case about a week later on February 14, 2020. See Dckt. No. 1, at 4 of 6. Based on the Court's independent review, it appears that Swift Transportation, Inc. was not a party at the time of removal, which would narrow the field of relevant entities when assessing diversity (and also would require a change on the Court's docket, which currently identifies Swift Transportation, Inc. as a party). By May 29, 2020, the parties shall file another joint statement that clearly identifies all of the parties at the time of removal, and confirms that Swift Transportation Inc. was not a party at that time. The parties requested a discovery deadline of August 2, 2021, almost 15 months from now. It is not clear to the Court why the parties need so much time to complete fact discovery in this personal injury case. Fact discovery will close on April 30, 2021. If a party believe that there is good cause under Rule 16 for more time, that party may file a motion down the road. But the parties should work toward meeting that deadline in the meantime. Plaintiff's expert disclosures are due by June 30, 2021, and the depositions must take place by July 31, 2021. Defendants' expert disclosures are due by August 31, 2021, and the depositions must be completed by September 30, 2021. Dispositive motions are due by October 31, 2021. Plaintiff shall make a good faith, written settlement demand by June 30, 2020. Defendants must respond in writing and in good faith by July 31, 2020. The status hearing previously set for June 25, 2020 is stricken. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) (Entered: 05/21/2020)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:20-cv-01101_de20 AdministrativeID "20" @default.
- ilnd;;1:20-cv-01101_de20 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:20-cv-01101_de19 @default.