Scheduling Order Key Dates

can you explain this scheduling order to me::In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure *(f) and Judge Cave’s Individual Practices, the parties met on January *, * (at least one week before the Initial Case Management Conference) and exchanged communications thereafter. The parties now submit the following report for the Court’s consideration: *. The Court’s Expectations: Rule * and Rule *(b)(*). Counsel are expected to have reviewed Federal Rules of Civil Procedure * and Rule *(b)(*) and considered their obligations thereunder in discussing and preparing a discovery plan. Additional consideration of proportionality. Counsel shall discuss and consider whether phased or iterative discovery will increase efficiency, reduce costs and lead to a faster resolution of the case when preparing a discovery plan. Document Requests. Counsel shall be fully familiar with their obligations under Rules * and *(g) and consider and discuss ways to ensure compliance and minimize disputes regarding overbreadth and specificity of requests and responses. Competence. Counsel shall be sufficiently knowledgeable in matters relating to their clients’ technological systems to discuss competently issues relating to electronic discovery, or have involved someone competent to address these issues on their behalf. Counsel are directed to the Model Confidentiality Stipulation and Proposed Protective Order and Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Concerning the Protocol for Conducting Remote Depositions on Judge Cave’s Individual Practices Page. Case *:*-cv-*-AT-SLC Document * Filed */*/* Page * of * * Counsel represent by their signature below that they have read and will comply with the above. *. Summary of Claims, Defenses, and Relevant Issues: Plaintiff(s): Plaintiff claims design defect, manufacturing defect, failure to warn, causation, damages, and harm and injury suffered. Defendant(s): Defendant, Toto U.S.A., Inc. (“Toto”), respectfully submits the following defenses at this preliminary stage: *. The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Toto in this case. Toto is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in Georgia. There is no general personal jurisdiction over Toto in New York because Toto is not at home in New York. There is also no specific personal jurisdiction over Toto because the incident in Puerto Rico does not arise from or relate to in any way to any of Toto’s activities in New York. *. Venue is improper in this Court. The incident giving rise to this action occurred in Puerto Rico. Toto is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in Georgia. Moreover, Toto is not subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court with respect to this specific action. Therefore, venue is improper in the Southern District of New York under *. U.S.C. Section *(b). *. The Complaint fails to state a cause of action against Toto. The First Count alleges negligence in “overseeing, supervision and administration of the facilities in the men’s room at the Marriott Hotel in San Juan, Puerto Rice.” (Pl. Compl. At p. *). Toto is in the business of manufacturing and selling plumbing products and has no responsibility or ability to oversee, supervise, or run any facilities at a Marriott hotel. The Complaint further states that Toto was responsible for “the maintenance of the plumbing fixtures” at the hotel through its employees and contractors. (Pl. Compl. P. *). Toto has no such responsibility. The Complaint also claims that Toto was negligent and careless in the “maintenance and operation of the facilities.” (Pl. Compl. P. *). Toto has no control over the Marriott hotel where the subject occurrence took place. *. Toto did not manufacture or distribute the toilet bowl described in Plaintiff’s complaint. *. Basis of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (and any dispute as to jurisdiction): Plaintiff claims diversity jurisdiction. Case *:*-cv-*-AT-SLC Document * Filed */*/* Page * of * * Toto respectfully submits that while Plaintiff’s Complaint alleged over $*,* in damages, there is no basis for this allegation. *. Subjects on Which Discovery May Be Needed: Plaintiff(s): Plaintiff will request discovery on the subject of the design, manufacturing, and warnings of the toilet bowl or the plumbing system, which allegedly caused his injuries. Plaintiff intends to utilize document requests, interrogatories, depositions, physical evidence and expert witnesses. Defendant(s): Discovery will be needed to identify the manufacturer of the toilet at issue as well as the circumstances of the claimed incident. If the case is not dismissed, discovery of on Plaintiff’s damages will also be necessary. *. Informal Disclosures: Plaintiff[s] will disclose the information required by Rule *(a)(*) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by February *, *. On February *, *, Plaintiff[s] will produce an initial set of relevant documents identified in his Initial Disclosures and will continue to supplement his production. Defendant[s] will disclose the information required by Rule *(a)(*) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on February *, *. On February *, *, Defendant[s] will produce an initial set of relevant documents identified in its Initial Disclosures and will continue to supplement [its/their] production. March *, * March *, * March *, * March *, * Case *:*-cv-*-AT-SLC Document * Filed */*/* Page * of * * *. Discovery Plan: The parties jointly propose to the Court the following discovery plan: A. All fact discovery must be completed by June *, *. Within one week of the close of fact discovery, that is June *, *, the parties must file a joint letter on the docket certifying that fact is discovery is complete. B. The parties will conduct discovery in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of the Southern District of New York, and Judge Cave’s Individual Practices. The following interim deadlines may be extended by the parties on written consent without application to the Court, provided that the parties meet the deadline for completing fact discovery set forth in paragraph *(A) above. i. Depositions: Depositions shall be completed by May *, * and limited to no more than * depositions per party. Absent an agreement between the parties or an order from the Court, non-party depositions shall follow initial party depositions. ii. Interrogatories: Initial sets of interrogatories shall be served on or before February *, *. All subsequent interrogatories must be served no later than 30 days before the fact discovery deadline. iii. Requests for Admission: Requests for admission must be served on or before May *, *, and in any event no later than 30 days before the fact discovery deadline. iv. Requests for Production: Initial requests for production were/will be exchanged on February *, *, and responses shall be due on March *, *. All subsequent requests for production must be served no later than 30 days before the discovery deadline. July *, * March *, * March *, * April *, * Case *:*-cv-*-AT-SLC Document * Filed */*/* Page * of * * v. Supplementation: Supplementations under Rule *(e) must be made within a reasonable period of time after discovery of such information, and in any event, no later than the fact discovery deadline. *. Anticipated Discovery Disputes: Describe any anticipated discovery disputes or proposed limitations on discovery. The parties do not currently anticipate any discovery disputes. *. Amendments to Pleadings: a. Does any party anticipate amending the pleadings? The parties wish to reserve their right to amend pleadings. b. Last date to amend any pleading pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. *(a) is February *, *. Amendment of pleadings after this date will be permitted only on a showing of “good cause” under Fed. R. Civ. P. *(b)(*). *. Expert Witness Disclosures: a. Does any party anticipate utilizing experts? Both parties anticipate utilizing experts at this time. b. Expert discovery shall be completed by August *, *. Within one week of the close of expert discovery, that is, August *, *, the parties must file a joint letter on the docket certifying that all discovery is complete. This letter should also state which dispositive motions, if any, each party intends to file. *. Electronic Discovery and Preservation of Documents and Information: a. Have the parties discussed discovery of electronically stored information (ESI)? The parties discussed discovery of electronically stored in formation and do not anticipate any such discovery at this time. b. Is there an ESI discovery protocol in place? If not, the parties expect to have one in place by . See above. March *, * September *, * Case *:*-cv-*-AT-SLC Document * Filed */*/* Page * of * * c. Are there issues the parties would like to address concerning preservation of evidence and/or ESI discovery at the Initial Case Management Conference? No, see above. *. Early Settlement or Resolution: The parties have/have not (circle one) discussed the possibility of settlement. The parties request a settlement conference by no later than July *, *. The following information is needed before settlement can be discussed: Toto requires information identifying the manufacturer of the toilets in the men’s bathroom used by Plaintiff as well as factual specifics of the occurrence described in the Complaint. Toto also requires particularization of Plaintiff’s claimed damages and any claimed injuries. *. Trial: a. The parties anticipate that this case will be ready for trial by December *, *. b. The parties anticipate that the trial of this case will require 5 days. c. The parties do/do not (circle one) consent to a trial before a Magistrate Judge at this time. d. The parties request a jury/bench (circle one) trial. Plaintiff requests a jury trial. Toto respectfully submits that Plaintiff waived his right for a jury trial under Fed. R. Civ. P. *. *. Other Matters: a. Fed. R. Evid. *(d). The disclosure of documents or information (electronic or otherwise) subject to the attorney-client privilege, the work product doctrine, or other privilege or immunity from production shall not operate as a waiver of that privilege or immunity in this case or in any other federal or state proceeding. This paragraph shall be interpreted to provide the maximum protection permitted by Fed. R. Evid. *(d). Case *:*-cv-*-AT-SLC Document * Filed */*/* Page * of * * Respectfully submitted this 30th day of January, *. PLAINTIFF PRO SE: ATTORNEY

what are the start dates and end dates

are these the important dates to watch

and how about for depositions