a. Discovery Motions

The Court will not hear or consider any discovery motions unless the parties have complied with the meet and confer requirement under Local Rule 37.2. Any discovery motion must state with specificity when and how the movant complied with Local Rule 37.2.

Parties are reminded that compliance with Local Rule 37.2 requires a good faith effort to resolve discovery disputes and, other than in exceptional circumstances, communication that takes place face to face or by telephone.  The mere exchange of correspondence will not normally be sufficient to comply with Local Rule 37.2.

All parties must be fully prepared to orally argue any discovery motion on the date that it is presented.  The Court may decide discovery motions after oral argument at the motion call and without briefing.  If after argument the Court believes that the motion requires briefing, the Court normally will set an expedited briefing schedule so that the matter can be resolved promptly.

b. Other Motions

The meet and confer requirement can have the same effect on other disputes that it has in connection with discovery disputes.  A candid discussion between the parties prior to filing motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, and motions in limine, among others, can limit the scope of such motions or eliminate the need for them to be filed at all.

Thus, the Court will apply the meet and confer requirement not just to discovery motions, but to all motions that a party wishes to file.  The comments above concerning what must be done to comply with the meet and confer requirement will be applied with equal force, and in the same way, with respect to all other motions.

a. Discovery Motions

The Court will not hear or consider any discovery motions unless the parties have complied with the meet and confer requirement under Local Rule 37.2. Any discovery motion must state with specificity when and how the movant complied with Local Rule 37.2.

Parties are reminded that compliance with Local Rule 37.2 requires a good faith effort to resolve discovery disputes and, other than in exceptional circumstances, communication that takes place face to face or by telephone.  The mere exchange of correspondence will not normally be sufficient to comply with Local Rule 37.2.

All parties must be fully prepared to orally argue any discovery motion on the date that it is presented.  The Court may decide discovery motions after oral argument at the motion call and without briefing.  If after argument the Court believes that the motion requires briefing, the Court normally will set an expedited briefing schedule so that the matter can be resolved promptly.

b. Other Motions

The meet and confer requirement can have the same effect on other disputes that it has in connection with discovery disputes.  A candid discussion between the parties prior to filing motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, and motions in limine, among others, can limit the scope of such motions or eliminate the need for them to be filed at all.

Thus, the Court will apply the meet and confer requirement not just to discovery motions, but to all motions that a party wishes to file.  The comments above concerning what must be done to comply with the meet and confer requirement will be applied with equal force, and in the same way, with respect to all other motions.

Before requesting entry of a confidentiality order to preserve the confidentiality of materials disclosed in discovery, counsel shall carefully review Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), which requires that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an effort to resolve the dispute without court action.

For agreed confidentiality orders in civil cases, to the extent possible, counsel should use the Model Confidentiality Order developed by the Northern District of Illinois.  Any proposed agreed confidentiality order must be provided to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox in Word format.  A corresponding motion for a confidentiality order should also be filed on the docket, unless the Court has given prior leave to submit a confidentiality order without a motion.

If the proposed agreed confidentiality order differs from the model, in addition to a clean Word version of the revised model order, counsel must provide a redlined copy showing any changes.  The clean and redlined copies of the confidentiality order shall be submitted to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox:  Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov.  If the confidentiality order anticipates that any documents or confidential materials submitted to the court are to be filed under seal, the confidentiality order must include, at a minimum a carefully-drafted definition of the materials to be protected, with an explanation of why these documents are entitled to protection.  No document shall be filed under seal unless counsel secures a court order allowing the filing of a document under seal.  See Local Rule 5.8.

Use of Medical Records in Litigation.  The Court reminds counsel that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and its regulations create a procedure for obtaining authority to use medical records in litigation, including requesting a qualified protective order. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e).  A “qualified protective order” means an order that: (1) prohibits the parties from using or disclosing the protected health information for any purpose other than the litigation for which such information was requested and (2) requires the return to the covered entity or destruction of the protected health information (including all copies made) at the end of the litigation. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e)(1)(v).

For qualified protective orders, to the extent possible, counsel should use the Example of a HIPAA Protective Order developed by the Northern District of Illinois.  Any proposed agreed qualified protective order must be provided to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox in Word format.  A corresponding motion for a qualified protective order should also be filed on the docket, unless the Court has given prior leave to submit a qualified protective order without a motion.

If the proposed qualified protective order differs from the model, in addition to a clean Word version of the revised model order, counsel must provide a redlined copy showing any changes.  The clean and redlined copies of the qualified protective order shall be submitted to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox:  Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov. 

Before requesting entry of a confidentiality order to preserve the confidentiality of materials disclosed in discovery, counsel shall carefully review Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), which requires that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an effort to resolve the dispute without court action.

For agreed confidentiality orders in civil cases, to the extent possible, counsel should use the Model Confidentiality Order developed by the Northern District of Illinois.  Any proposed agreed confidentiality order must be provided to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox in Word format.  A corresponding motion for a confidentiality order should also be filed on the docket, unless the Court has given prior leave to submit a confidentiality order without a motion.

If the proposed agreed confidentiality order differs from the model, in addition to a clean Word version of the revised model order, counsel must provide a redlined copy showing any changes.  The clean and redlined copies of the confidentiality order shall be submitted to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox:  Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov.  If the confidentiality order anticipates that any documents or confidential materials submitted to the court are to be filed under seal, the confidentiality order must include, at a minimum a carefully-drafted definition of the materials to be protected, with an explanation of why these documents are entitled to protection.  No document shall be filed under seal unless counsel secures a court order allowing the filing of a document under seal.  See Local Rule 5.8.

Use of Medical Records in Litigation.  The Court reminds counsel that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and its regulations create a procedure for obtaining authority to use medical records in litigation, including requesting a qualified protective order. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e).  A “qualified protective order” means an order that: (1) prohibits the parties from using or disclosing the protected health information for any purpose other than the litigation for which such information was requested and (2) requires the return to the covered entity or destruction of the protected health information (including all copies made) at the end of the litigation. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e)(1)(v).

For qualified protective orders, to the extent possible, counsel should use the Example of a HIPAA Protective Order developed by the Northern District of Illinois.  Any proposed agreed qualified protective order must be provided to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox in Word format.  A corresponding motion for a qualified protective order should also be filed on the docket, unless the Court has given prior leave to submit a qualified protective order without a motion.

If the proposed qualified protective order differs from the model, in addition to a clean Word version of the revised model order, counsel must provide a redlined copy showing any changes.  The clean and redlined copies of the qualified protective order shall be submitted to Judge Schneider’s proposed order inbox:  Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov. 

The Court expects the parties to hold a 26(f) conference before the initial status conference.  At the initial status conference, the Court will provide a deadline for filing a joint proposed Case Management Order.  The proposed Case Management Order shall be e-filed by the deadline.

The parties must use the following fillable form for the proposed Case Management Order.  It shall not be retyped.  Additional pages may be attached for information that does not fit on the form, such as the names of additional parties and/or counsel.  Case Management Order

The Court expects the parties to hold a 26(f) conference before the initial status conference.  At the initial status conference, the Court will provide a deadline for filing a joint proposed Case Management Order.  The proposed Case Management Order shall be e-filed by the deadline.

The parties must use the following fillable form for the proposed Case Management Order.  It shall not be retyped.  Additional pages may be attached for information that does not fit on the form, such as the names of additional parties and/or counsel.  Case Management Order

The Court will set all newly filed cases for an initial status approximately 60 days from the filing of complaint.  Lead counsel must appear at the initial status hearing, must have knowledge of the case, and must be prepared to discuss all aspects of the case including anticipated discovery.  At least four (4) business days before the initial status hearing or by the date set by the Court, any party that has appeared shall join in completing and filing this Court's Joint Initial Status Report.  The parties must use the form available on this webpage and shall not edit or retype it.  Any additional information the parties want to share with the Court or that does not fit on the form should be attached to the form.

The Court will set all newly filed cases for an initial status approximately 60 days from the filing of complaint.  Lead counsel must appear at the initial status hearing, must have knowledge of the case, and must be prepared to discuss all aspects of the case including anticipated discovery.  At least four (4) business days before the initial status hearing or by the date set by the Court, any party that has appeared shall join in completing and filing this Court's Joint Initial Status Report.  The parties must use the form available on this webpage and shall not edit or retype it.  Any additional information the parties want to share with the Court or that does not fit on the form should be attached to the form.

Judge Schneider encourages parties to consent to her jurisdiction so that she may preside over the entirety of the case, including ruling on dispositive motions and presiding over any trial. Parties may also decide to consent to her jurisdiction for limited purposes, such as for ruling on a Pavey hearing.  Because Judge Schneider does not handle felony criminal cases, she generally is able to accommodate the requests of counsel for particular (and firm) trial dates.  Parties are encouraged to read 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73 regarding trial by consent and discuss this option with their clients and opposing counsel.  Magistrate Judge Consent Form  Limited Consent Form

Judge Schneider encourages parties to consent to her jurisdiction so that she may preside over the entirety of the case, including ruling on dispositive motions and presiding over any trial. Parties may also decide to consent to her jurisdiction for limited purposes, such as for ruling on a Pavey hearing.  Because Judge Schneider does not handle felony criminal cases, she generally is able to accommodate the requests of counsel for particular (and firm) trial dates.  Parties are encouraged to read 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73 regarding trial by consent and discuss this option with their clients and opposing counsel.  Magistrate Judge Consent Form  Limited Consent Form

Default is a drastic remedy.  Consequently, the process used must be carefully followed, including providing the proper notice to the party against which default is being sought (“defaulting party”).  Default judgments sought under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) require a two-step process.  Counsel must not conflate the two procedures and must rigorously adhere to the time frames specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 55.

First, there must be an entry of default, either by the Clerk of the Court or by a court order directing the Clerk to enter the default.  A written request for an entry of default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) shall be accompanied by an affidavit or declaration showing that the defaulting party: (1) is not an infant, in the military, or an incompetent person; (2) has failed to plead or otherwise defend the action; and (3) has been properly served with the pleading.  A copy of the proof of service must also be attached to the motion if not already docketed.

Second, there must be a motion for default judgment.  A party moving for a default judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) shall file a motion and supporting legal documents and notify the Court's Operations Specialist to set a date and time for a hearing on the motion.  Service of the motion for default judgment must occur at least 7 days before the motion for default judgment is presented.  The Court will strike all motions for default judgment that fail to provide sufficient notice.  The moving party shall also append as exhibits to the motion for default judgment: (1) a copy of the Clerk’s entry of default; (2) supporting affidavits or declarations; and (3) a proposed form of default judgment.  The motion, exhibits, and notice of date and time of hearing shall be mailed by regular and certified mail to the defaulting party at the last known address of the defaulting party.  A copy of the return receipt evidencing delivery, when returned by the post office, shall be filed with the Court.  In cases involving joint and several liability, it may be premature to move for a default judgment against one defendant in a multi-defendant case because a damages hearing will not be held until the liability of each non-defaulting defendant has been resolved.  See In re Uranium Antitrust Litig., 617F.2d 1248, 1262 (7th Cir. 1980).  However, a determination of damages against the defaulting party can be made if the claims against the non-defaulting parties are dismissed.  See Domanus v. Lewcki, 742 F.3d 290, 304 (7th Cir. 2014).

As provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(1) a default judgment for a sum certain may be sought from the clerk by written request accompanied by an affidavit providing the information detailed in the rule.

Failure to comply with this standing order will result in the denial of the motion.

Default is a drastic remedy.  Consequently, the process used must be carefully followed, including providing the proper notice to the party against which default is being sought (“defaulting party”).  Default judgments sought under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) require a two-step process.  Counsel must not conflate the two procedures and must rigorously adhere to the time frames specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 55.

First, there must be an entry of default, either by the Clerk of the Court or by a court order directing the Clerk to enter the default.  A written request for an entry of default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) shall be accompanied by an affidavit or declaration showing that the defaulting party: (1) is not an infant, in the military, or an incompetent person; (2) has failed to plead or otherwise defend the action; and (3) has been properly served with the pleading.  A copy of the proof of service must also be attached to the motion if not already docketed.

Second, there must be a motion for default judgment.  A party moving for a default judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) shall file a motion and supporting legal documents and notify the Court's Operations Specialist to set a date and time for a hearing on the motion.  Service of the motion for default judgment must occur at least 7 days before the motion for default judgment is presented.  The Court will strike all motions for default judgment that fail to provide sufficient notice.  The moving party shall also append as exhibits to the motion for default judgment: (1) a copy of the Clerk’s entry of default; (2) supporting affidavits or declarations; and (3) a proposed form of default judgment.  The motion, exhibits, and notice of date and time of hearing shall be mailed by regular and certified mail to the defaulting party at the last known address of the defaulting party.  A copy of the return receipt evidencing delivery, when returned by the post office, shall be filed with the Court.  In cases involving joint and several liability, it may be premature to move for a default judgment against one defendant in a multi-defendant case because a damages hearing will not be held until the liability of each non-defaulting defendant has been resolved.  See In re Uranium Antitrust Litig., 617F.2d 1248, 1262 (7th Cir. 1980).  However, a determination of damages against the defaulting party can be made if the claims against the non-defaulting parties are dismissed.  See Domanus v. Lewcki, 742 F.3d 290, 304 (7th Cir. 2014).

As provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(1) a default judgment for a sum certain may be sought from the clerk by written request accompanied by an affidavit providing the information detailed in the rule.

Failure to comply with this standing order will result in the denial of the motion.

The Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) govern Social Security disability appeals. In cases where the certified administrative record has been filed on or after January 1, 2024, and the Court has not set a different briefing schedule, the following schedule applies. Plaintiff must file and serve an opening brief within 30 days after the Commissioner files a certified copy of the administrative record. Suppl. Rule 6. The Commissioner must file and serve a response brief within 30 days after service of Plaintiff’s brief. Suppl. Rule 7. Plaintiff may file and serve a reply brief within 14 days after service of the Commissioner’s brief. Suppl. Rule 8.

Motions for summary judgment are not required; the action is presented for decision by the parties’ briefs. Suppl. Rule 5. Absent leave of Court, all briefs must comply with the 15-page limitation set forth in Local Rule 7.1.

The Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) govern Social Security disability appeals. In cases where the certified administrative record has been filed on or after January 1, 2024, and the Court has not set a different briefing schedule, the following schedule applies. Plaintiff must file and serve an opening brief within 30 days after the Commissioner files a certified copy of the administrative record. Suppl. Rule 6. The Commissioner must file and serve a response brief within 30 days after service of Plaintiff’s brief. Suppl. Rule 7. Plaintiff may file and serve a reply brief within 14 days after service of the Commissioner’s brief. Suppl. Rule 8.

Motions for summary judgment are not required; the action is presented for decision by the parties’ briefs. Suppl. Rule 5. Absent leave of Court, all briefs must comply with the 15-page limitation set forth in Local Rule 7.1.

The Court has prepared a Standing Order setting forth its settlement conference procedures.  That Standing Order may be obtained from this website or from the operations specialist.  Counsel and their clients must read and follow the procedures in that Standing Order prior to any settlement conference with the Court.  Instructions for Settlement Conferences

The Court has prepared a Standing Order setting forth its settlement conference procedures.  That Standing Order may be obtained from this website or from the operations specialist.  Counsel and their clients must read and follow the procedures in that Standing Order prior to any settlement conference with the Court.  Instructions for Settlement Conferences

No motion for an extension of time to file pleadings or to comply with other time requirements will be entertained by Judge Schneider unless the movant includes in the motion a statement (1) that the movant has sought the other side's agreement to the extension and (2) specifying the result of that request.

No motion for an extension of time to file pleadings or to comply with other time requirements will be entertained by Judge Schneider unless the movant includes in the motion a statement (1) that the movant has sought the other side's agreement to the extension and (2) specifying the result of that request.

The Court requires strict compliance with Local Rules 56.1(a) and 56.1(b) in the briefing of all summary judgment motions.  In addition, to assist the Court in reviewing the factual record submitted in connection with summary judgment motions, the Court requires the following:

All statements of undisputed material facts offered by the moving party under Local Rule 56.1(a)(3), or statements of additional facts offered by the opposing party under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C), must list the facts in short, numbered paragraphs that refrain from argument.  Argument must be reserved for the moving party’s memorandum of law.  Each numbered fact statement must contain a specific citation to affidavits, depositions or other materials that support the fact statement, as well as to the tab(s) in the compendium where those materials may be found.  Failure to provide support for a statement of fact may result in that alleged "fact" being disregarded.  Friend v. Valley View Community Unit School Dist. 365U, 789 F.3d 707, 710-11 (7th Cir. 2015).

All responses to statements of undisputed material facts offered by the opposing party under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B), or responses to statements of additional facts offered by the moving party under Local Rule 56.1(a), shall be in a format similar to that used in answering a complaint: that is, the response must repeat each numbered paragraph of the fact statement, and then immediately following each numbered statement must state whether the alleged fact is "undisputed" or "disputed."  As with the fact statements submitted under Local Rules 56.1(a)(3) and 56.1(b)(3)(C), the responses to those fact statements must refrain from argument.  The significance or lack of significance of a disputed or undisputed fact may be argued in the respondent’s legal memorandum.  If a particular fact is "undisputed," nothing more should be said in the response.  If a particular fact assertion is "disputed" in whole or in part, the response must state what part of the assertion is disputed and must contain a specific citation to the supporting affidavits, depositions or other materials as well as to the tab(s) in the compendium where those materials may be found.  Failure to provide support for an alleged fact dispute may result in that fact being deemed admitted.  Curtis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 807 F.3d 215, 218-19 (7th Cir. 2015).

In accord with Local Rule 56.1, absent prior leave of Court, a movant shall not file more than 80 separately numbered statements of undisputed material fact, and a party opposing a summary judgment motion shall not file more than 40 separately numbered statements of additional facts under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C).  The Court reminds parties that the fact statements under Local Rule 56.1(a)(3) and Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C) “shall consist of short numbered paragraphs.”

Motions to strike or deemed admitted Local Rule 56.1 statement of facts will not be accepted by the Court.  These concerns should be raised in the parties’ briefs.

The Court requires strict compliance with Local Rules 56.1(a) and 56.1(b) in the briefing of all summary judgment motions.  In addition, to assist the Court in reviewing the factual record submitted in connection with summary judgment motions, the Court requires the following:

All statements of undisputed material facts offered by the moving party under Local Rule 56.1(a)(3), or statements of additional facts offered by the opposing party under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C), must list the facts in short, numbered paragraphs that refrain from argument.  Argument must be reserved for the moving party’s memorandum of law.  Each numbered fact statement must contain a specific citation to affidavits, depositions or other materials that support the fact statement, as well as to the tab(s) in the compendium where those materials may be found.  Failure to provide support for a statement of fact may result in that alleged "fact" being disregarded.  Friend v. Valley View Community Unit School Dist. 365U, 789 F.3d 707, 710-11 (7th Cir. 2015).

All responses to statements of undisputed material facts offered by the opposing party under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B), or responses to statements of additional facts offered by the moving party under Local Rule 56.1(a), shall be in a format similar to that used in answering a complaint: that is, the response must repeat each numbered paragraph of the fact statement, and then immediately following each numbered statement must state whether the alleged fact is "undisputed" or "disputed."  As with the fact statements submitted under Local Rules 56.1(a)(3) and 56.1(b)(3)(C), the responses to those fact statements must refrain from argument.  The significance or lack of significance of a disputed or undisputed fact may be argued in the respondent’s legal memorandum.  If a particular fact is "undisputed," nothing more should be said in the response.  If a particular fact assertion is "disputed" in whole or in part, the response must state what part of the assertion is disputed and must contain a specific citation to the supporting affidavits, depositions or other materials as well as to the tab(s) in the compendium where those materials may be found.  Failure to provide support for an alleged fact dispute may result in that fact being deemed admitted.  Curtis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 807 F.3d 215, 218-19 (7th Cir. 2015).

In accord with Local Rule 56.1, absent prior leave of Court, a movant shall not file more than 80 separately numbered statements of undisputed material fact, and a party opposing a summary judgment motion shall not file more than 40 separately numbered statements of additional facts under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C).  The Court reminds parties that the fact statements under Local Rule 56.1(a)(3) and Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C) “shall consist of short numbered paragraphs.”

Motions to strike or deemed admitted Local Rule 56.1 statement of facts will not be accepted by the Court.  These concerns should be raised in the parties’ briefs.

In the event that a party withholds otherwise discoverable information on the ground of privilege, the withholding party generally must provide a log of the documents withheld on the ground of privilege.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(A) and Advisory Committee Comments to 1993 Amendments.  Any privilege log must be detailed enough to enable other parties to assess the applicability of the privilege asserted, and should include: (1) the name and capacity of each individual from whom or to whom a document and any attachments were sent (including which persons are lawyers); (2) the date of the document and any attachments; (3) the type of document; (4) the Bates numbers of the documents, (5) the nature of the privilege asserted; and (6) a description of the subject matter in sufficient detail to determine if legal advice was sought or revealed, or if the document constitutes work product.  See RBS Citizens, N.A. v. Husain, 291 F.R.D. 209, 218 (N.D. Ill. 2013).

The Court reminds the parties that the meet and confer requirements of Local Rule 37.2 apply to privilege disputes, just as they do to other discovery disputes.

In the event that a party withholds otherwise discoverable information on the ground of privilege, the withholding party generally must provide a log of the documents withheld on the ground of privilege.  See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(A) and Advisory Committee Comments to 1993 Amendments.  Any privilege log must be detailed enough to enable other parties to assess the applicability of the privilege asserted, and should include: (1) the name and capacity of each individual from whom or to whom a document and any attachments were sent (including which persons are lawyers); (2) the date of the document and any attachments; (3) the type of document; (4) the Bates numbers of the documents, (5) the nature of the privilege asserted; and (6) a description of the subject matter in sufficient detail to determine if legal advice was sought or revealed, or if the document constitutes work product.  See RBS Citizens, N.A. v. Husain, 291 F.R.D. 209, 218 (N.D. Ill. 2013).

The Court reminds the parties that the meet and confer requirements of Local Rule 37.2 apply to privilege disputes, just as they do to other discovery disputes.

The Court will dispense with its three-day notice requirement only in connection with emergency motions.  To qualify as an "emergency," a motion must arise from an unforeseen circumstance that arises suddenly and unexpectedly, and that requires immediate action in order to avoid serious or irreparable harm to one or more of the parties.  Motions for extension of time for filing, or for continuances of deadlines or other dates previously set by the Court, are highly unlikely to qualify as "emergencies."  In the event a party seeks to present an emergency motion, that party must inform the courtroom deputy by email at Jillian_Person@ilnd.uscourts.gov prior to filing the motion of the general nature of the motion and the reason that it requires emergency treatment, so that it can be determined if emergency treatment is appropriate.  A party seeking to present an emergency motion must make all reasonable efforts to provide the opposing party with actual notice of the motion.

The Court will dispense with its three-day notice requirement only in connection with emergency motions.  To qualify as an "emergency," a motion must arise from an unforeseen circumstance that arises suddenly and unexpectedly, and that requires immediate action in order to avoid serious or irreparable harm to one or more of the parties.  Motions for extension of time for filing, or for continuances of deadlines or other dates previously set by the Court, are highly unlikely to qualify as "emergencies."  In the event a party seeks to present an emergency motion, that party must inform the courtroom deputy by email at Jillian_Person@ilnd.uscourts.gov prior to filing the motion of the general nature of the motion and the reason that it requires emergency treatment, so that it can be determined if emergency treatment is appropriate.  A party seeking to present an emergency motion must make all reasonable efforts to provide the opposing party with actual notice of the motion.

Proposed Orders are technically not to be "filed."  Rather, they are to be "submitted" to the judge to consider, modify (if appropriate) and enter electronically. For example, proposed orders such as stipulated protective orders require court approval before actually being given full effect.  To prevent confusion, such proposed orders must be attached to an e-mail sent to the e-mail address of the assigned judge, Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov.  The subject line of the e-mail must include the case number and name, the docket number of the corresponding motion, if any, and the title of the order that is proposed. All such documents must be submitted to the court in a format compatible with Word.  Such proposed orders should also be served on all parties.

Proposed Orders are technically not to be "filed."  Rather, they are to be "submitted" to the judge to consider, modify (if appropriate) and enter electronically. For example, proposed orders such as stipulated protective orders require court approval before actually being given full effect.  To prevent confusion, such proposed orders must be attached to an e-mail sent to the e-mail address of the assigned judge, Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov.  The subject line of the e-mail must include the case number and name, the docket number of the corresponding motion, if any, and the title of the order that is proposed. All such documents must be submitted to the court in a format compatible with Word.  Such proposed orders should also be served on all parties.

Following the Joint Initial Status Report, the Court will order the parties to periodically file Joint Status Reports. These Reports must address the following three areas: (1) generally summarize each parties’ respective activities in discovery through the date of the Joint Status Report; (2) alert the Court to any pending and unresolved discovery disputes, if any; and (3) update the Court on the likelihood of settlement. In addition to addressing these three points, any Report also must include any topic specifically ordered by the Court.

Following the Joint Initial Status Report, the Court will order the parties to periodically file Joint Status Reports. These Reports must address the following three areas: (1) generally summarize each parties’ respective activities in discovery through the date of the Joint Status Report; (2) alert the Court to any pending and unresolved discovery disputes, if any; and (3) update the Court on the likelihood of settlement. In addition to addressing these three points, any Report also must include any topic specifically ordered by the Court.

After the conclusion of a trial, no party, agent, or attorney shall communicate with any members of the petit jury before which the case was tried without first receiving permission of the Court.

After the conclusion of a trial, no party, agent, or attorney shall communicate with any members of the petit jury before which the case was tried without first receiving permission of the Court.

In all referral cases, Magistrate Judge Schneider will direct the parties to use the Final Pretrial Order form for the District Court Judge assigned to the case. The parties are, therefore, directed to consult the assigned District Court Judge’s webpage for the proper order. In all consent cases (where Magistrate Judge Schneider will be the presiding trial judge), please contact Judge Schneider’s Chambers to obtain the Final Pretrial Order form.

In all referral cases, Magistrate Judge Schneider will direct the parties to use the Final Pretrial Order form for the District Court Judge assigned to the case. The parties are, therefore, directed to consult the assigned District Court Judge’s webpage for the proper order. In all consent cases (where Magistrate Judge Schneider will be the presiding trial judge), please contact Judge Schneider’s Chambers to obtain the Final Pretrial Order form.

At the initial status hearing on cases brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Court will provide a deadline for filing a joint proposed FLSA Scheduling Order in lieu of a proposed Case Management Order. The parties must use the following fillable form for the proposed FLSA Scheduling Order. It shall not be retyped. Upon completion, the parties shall file the proposed FLSA Scheduling Order and submit a copy to the Court’s proposed order inbox at Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov.

FLSA Scheduling Order

At the initial status hearing on cases brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Court will provide a deadline for filing a joint proposed FLSA Scheduling Order in lieu of a proposed Case Management Order. The parties must use the following fillable form for the proposed FLSA Scheduling Order. It shall not be retyped. Upon completion, the parties shall file the proposed FLSA Scheduling Order and submit a copy to the Court’s proposed order inbox at Proposed_Order_Schneider@ilnd.uscourts.gov.

FLSA Scheduling Order