Reassigned Cases - In all cases assigned to Judge Dow’s calendar from the calendar of another judge, the Court will issue an order setting a schedule for the filing of a Joint Status Report and an initial Status Conference.  $0Newly Filed Cases – For most newly filed cases, the Court will schedule an initial status conference approximately 60 days after the filing of the complaint.  In some cases, the scheduled status conference may take place before a defendant has responded to the plaintiff’s complaint. Defendants who have been served with process should participate in this conference even if they have not yet responded to the complaint. $0$0 $0$0Standing Order Regarding Initial Status Reports $0At least 2 days prior to the initial status conference, the parties are directed to file a joint written status report of not more than five pages.  At the initial status conference, counsel will be asked to discuss (i) the nature of the case; (ii) factual and legal issues; (iii) settlement discussions to date and settlement potential; (iv) discovery taken to date and anticipated in the future; and (v) potential motions to be filed.  Counsel who believes that an earlier initial status conference is warranted may make an appropriate request by contacting the Courtroom Deputy.  In removed cases where a remand motion is filed, the Court ordinarily will expedite the initial status conference.$0$0$0$0 Reassigned Cases - In all cases assigned to Judge Dow’s calendar from the calendar of another judge, the Court will issue an order setting a schedule for the filing of a Joint Status Report and an initial Status Conference.  $0Newly Filed Cases – For most newly filed cases, the Court will schedule an initial status conference approximately 60 days after the filing of the complaint.  In some cases, the scheduled status conference may take place before a defendant has responded to the plaintiff’s complaint. Defendants who have been served with process should participate in this conference even if they have not yet responded to the complaint. $0$0 $0$0Standing Order Regarding Initial Status Reports $0At least 2 days prior to the initial status conference, the parties are directed to file a joint written status report of not more than five pages.  At the initial status conference, counsel will be asked to discuss (i) the nature of the case; (ii) factual and legal issues; (iii) settlement discussions to date and settlement potential; (iv) discovery taken to date and anticipated in the future; and (v) potential motions to be filed.  Counsel who believes that an earlier initial status conference is warranted may make an appropriate request by contacting the Courtroom Deputy.  In removed cases where a remand motion is filed, the Court ordinarily will expedite the initial status conference.$0$0$0$0

General Procedures - All parties must comply with FRCP 26 and N.D. Ill. L.R. 26.1. Parties are advised that there is no “order” in which discovery must occur. One party’s failure or inability to respond to discovery requests does not excuse any other party’s timely compliance.  Parties also are reminded that the pendency of a motion – even a dispositive motion – does not operate as an automatic stay of discovery.

Discovery Disputes Generally - Parties should make every effort to resolve discovery disputes without the need for judicial intervention. Accordingly, discovery motions should be filed only as a last resort and will not be heard unless the moving party has complied with the “meet and confer” requirement of Local Rule 37.2. Any discovery motion must state with specificity when and how the moving party complied with Local Rule 37.2. Compliance with Local Rule 37.2 requires a good faith effort to resolve discovery disputes and ordinarily requires face-to-face or telephonic communication. In most instances, exchange of correspondence will not be sufficient under the Local Rules.

If a discovery motion becomes necessary, parties should be prepared to present argument on the date that the motion is presented. If the Court does not rule on the motion after hearing argument, it ordinarily will request expedited briefing so that the matter can be resolved promptly.

Electronic Discovery Disputes – If the parties have reached an impasse regarding the discovery of voluminous records from a database, server, computer, service provider or similar electronic storage facility (ESF), before filing a motion to compel, the parties are required to meet and confer with an IT representative of the ESF to be searched in order to determine the most effective way to retrieve the requested material. The party seeking the discovery must also bring its IT specialist to this meeting in order to discuss the proper format for the retrieval of the records. This electronic discovery conference must take place in person and both sides should be prepared to discuss specifically the parameters of both the search and the ESF.

General Procedures - All parties must comply with FRCP 26 and N.D. Ill. L.R. 26.1. Parties are advised that there is no “order” in which discovery must occur. One party’s failure or inability to respond to discovery requests does not excuse any other party’s timely compliance.  Parties also are reminded that the pendency of a motion – even a dispositive motion – does not operate as an automatic stay of discovery.

Discovery Disputes Generally - Parties should make every effort to resolve discovery disputes without the need for judicial intervention. Accordingly, discovery motions should be filed only as a last resort and will not be heard unless the moving party has complied with the “meet and confer” requirement of Local Rule 37.2. Any discovery motion must state with specificity when and how the moving party complied with Local Rule 37.2. Compliance with Local Rule 37.2 requires a good faith effort to resolve discovery disputes and ordinarily requires face-to-face or telephonic communication. In most instances, exchange of correspondence will not be sufficient under the Local Rules.

If a discovery motion becomes necessary, parties should be prepared to present argument on the date that the motion is presented. If the Court does not rule on the motion after hearing argument, it ordinarily will request expedited briefing so that the matter can be resolved promptly.

Electronic Discovery Disputes – If the parties have reached an impasse regarding the discovery of voluminous records from a database, server, computer, service provider or similar electronic storage facility (ESF), before filing a motion to compel, the parties are required to meet and confer with an IT representative of the ESF to be searched in order to determine the most effective way to retrieve the requested material. The party seeking the discovery must also bring its IT specialist to this meeting in order to discuss the proper format for the retrieval of the records. This electronic discovery conference must take place in person and both sides should be prepared to discuss specifically the parameters of both the search and the ESF.

Ordinarily, disputes should not arise during depositions.  If counsel expect significant disputes to arise, they may schedule a deposition in the attorney and witness room at the courthouse, where the Judge or Magistrate Judge will be available to resolve disputes.  When disputes arise during depositions outside the courthouse, counsel should contact the Courtroom Deputy, who will make arrangements for a conference call at which the Judge or Magistrate Judge will be available to rule on such disputes on the record over the telephone. Ordinarily, disputes should not arise during depositions.  If counsel expect significant disputes to arise, they may schedule a deposition in the attorney and witness room at the courthouse, where the Judge or Magistrate Judge will be available to resolve disputes.  When disputes arise during depositions outside the courthouse, counsel should contact the Courtroom Deputy, who will make arrangements for a conference call at which the Judge or Magistrate Judge will be available to rule on such disputes on the record over the telephone.

Please drop a courtesy copy of all motions in the box outside of the Courtroom Deputy’s office, located at Room 1914. All motions must be noticed for a date certain.  Motions to be noticed for Tuesday, Wednsday or Thursday at 9:15a.m. This Court requires 3 business days Notice.

Please attach copies of any cited authorities that are not available on Westlaw or Lexis. 

If a motion is joint, uncontested, or agreed, please so indicate in the title and body of the motion.   

A party seeking an extension of time must contact all other parties in the case to determine whether the motion is opposed.  The party seeking the extension should indicate in the motion (i) the reason for the request, (ii) the number of previous extensions, and (iii) whether the motion is opposed.  

To the extent possible, the Court will endeavor to rule on motions in advance of the date on which the motion is to be presented.  After 4:00 p.m. on the day before the motion is to be presented, the parties may check to determine whether a ruling has been issued. If so, an appearance will not be necessary. 

Counsel also may call the Courtroom Deputy, Theresa Kinney (312-435-5668) to inquire on the status of the motion.  If an appearance is not necessary, counsel for the moving party should notify counsel for the responding party or parties.

Please drop a courtesy copy of all motions in the box outside of the Courtroom Deputy’s office, located at Room 1914. All motions must be noticed for a date certain.  Motions to be noticed for Tuesday, Wednsday or Thursday at 9:15a.m. This Court requires 3 business days Notice.

Please attach copies of any cited authorities that are not available on Westlaw or Lexis. 

If a motion is joint, uncontested, or agreed, please so indicate in the title and body of the motion.   

A party seeking an extension of time must contact all other parties in the case to determine whether the motion is opposed.  The party seeking the extension should indicate in the motion (i) the reason for the request, (ii) the number of previous extensions, and (iii) whether the motion is opposed.  

To the extent possible, the Court will endeavor to rule on motions in advance of the date on which the motion is to be presented.  After 4:00 p.m. on the day before the motion is to be presented, the parties may check to determine whether a ruling has been issued. If so, an appearance will not be necessary. 

Counsel also may call the Courtroom Deputy, Theresa Kinney (312-435-5668) to inquire on the status of the motion.  If an appearance is not necessary, counsel for the moving party should notify counsel for the responding party or parties.

Unless directed by the Court and with the exception of courtesy copies, neither counsel nor pro se litigants may communicate about a case by letter.  All communications must be made in the form of a motion, brief, or a status report, properly noticed and served on opposing counsel. Unless directed by the Court and with the exception of courtesy copies, neither counsel nor pro se litigants may communicate about a case by letter.  All communications must be made in the form of a motion, brief, or a status report, properly noticed and served on opposing counsel.

Motions for summary judgment and responses must comply with Local Rules 56.1(a) and 56.1(b). The statements of undisputed material fact and responses shall be filed separately from the memoranda of law and shall include the line, paragraph, or page number where the supporting material may be found in the record. Courtesy copies of exhibits to summary judgment motions should be tabbed for easy access.

Failure to abide by the Local Rules may result in the Court striking briefs, disregarding statements of fact, deeming statements of fact admitted, or denying summary judgment. The movant shall not file more than 80 statements of undisputed material fact without prior leave of Court. The respondent shall be limited to 40 statements of undisputed material fact absent prior leave of the Court. In complex cases, the Court may request that the parties submit a timeline of events in addition to the statements of undisputed material fact. Motions for summary judgment and responses must comply with Local Rules 56.1(a) and 56.1(b). The statements of undisputed material fact and responses shall be filed separately from the memoranda of law and shall include the line, paragraph, or page number where the supporting material may be found in the record. Courtesy copies of exhibits to summary judgment motions should be tabbed for easy access.

Failure to abide by the Local Rules may result in the Court striking briefs, disregarding statements of fact, deeming statements of fact admitted, or denying summary judgment. The movant shall not file more than 80 statements of undisputed material fact without prior leave of Court. The respondent shall be limited to 40 statements of undisputed material fact absent prior leave of the Court. In complex cases, the Court may request that the parties submit a timeline of events in addition to the statements of undisputed material fact.

Motions to strike all or portions of an opposing party’s Local Rule 56.1 submission are disfavored. Under ordinary circumstances, if a party contends that its opponent has included inadmissible evidence, improper argument, or other objectionable material in a Rule 56.1 submission, the party’s argument that the offending material should not be considered should be included in its response or reply brief, not in a separate motion to strike. Motions to strike all or portions of an opposing party’s Local Rule 56.1 submission are disfavored. Under ordinary circumstances, if a party contends that its opponent has included inadmissible evidence, improper argument, or other objectionable material in a Rule 56.1 submission, the party’s argument that the offending material should not be considered should be included in its response or reply brief, not in a separate motion to strike.

The following briefing schedule will apply if cross motions for summary judgment will be filed. Defendant's summary judgment motion will be due on the dispositive motion filing deadline. Plaintiff's combined cross motion and response to the defendant's motion will be due three (3) weeks thereafter. Defendant's reply in support of its motion and response to the plaintiff's cross motion will be due three (3) weeks thereafter. Plaintiff's reply in support of its cross motion shall be due two (2) weeks thereafter. The following briefing schedule will apply if cross motions for summary judgment will be filed. Defendant's summary judgment motion will be due on the dispositive motion filing deadline. Plaintiff's combined cross motion and response to the defendant's motion will be due three (3) weeks thereafter. Defendant's reply in support of its motion and response to the plaintiff's cross motion will be due three (3) weeks thereafter. Plaintiff's reply in support of its cross motion shall be due two (2) weeks thereafter.

Proposed Orders should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court.  Instead, counsel should submit Proposed Orders electronically in a format that is compatible with Word to Proposed_Order_Dow@ilnd.uscourts.gov.  The subject line of the e-mail should include the case name and number, the docket number of the corresponding motion, if any, and the title of the order that is proposed as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing.  Counsel should serve a copy of the Proposed Order on all other parties.  Proposed Orders should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court.  Instead, counsel should submit Proposed Orders electronically in a format that is compatible with Word to Proposed_Order_Dow@ilnd.uscourts.gov.  The subject line of the e-mail should include the case name and number, the docket number of the corresponding motion, if any, and the title of the order that is proposed as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing.  Counsel should serve a copy of the Proposed Order on all other parties. 

In order to constitute an emergency, the circumstances giving rise to the motion must be of such a nature that a delay in hearing the motion would cause serious harm to one or more parties.  Requests to set a hearing on an emergency should be made to the Courtroom Deputy with as much advance notice as possible, and all reasonable efforts to give actual notice to opposing counsel should be made. In order to constitute an emergency, the circumstances giving rise to the motion must be of such a nature that a delay in hearing the motion would cause serious harm to one or more parties.  Requests to set a hearing on an emergency should be made to the Courtroom Deputy with as much advance notice as possible, and all reasonable efforts to give actual notice to opposing counsel should be made.

There is a presumption that the public will have access to all court filings.  In light of this presumption, Judge Dow will not sign a protective order which allows counsel, in their absolute discretion, to decide which matters are to be deemed confidential and filed under seal.  Where the circumstances warrant, the parties should file a proposed order which specifies the categories of documents or other matters which may be subject to the order (e.g. trade secrets, medical records, personnel files) and a motion in which the parties set forth why a protective order is necessary as to each category.  The court will then independently review the motion and determine if the order should be signed. 

The issuance of a protective order in light of this Standing Order will constitute the court's determination, as required by Rule 26(c), that good cause existed for such issuance. Issuance of any protective order will not, however, be given binding effect as a determination of good cause for Rule 26(c) purposes if at any future time either party moves for relief from the limitations of the protective order. At that time, this court will engage in an appropriate balancing of the interests between privacy and public access in order to make a new determination of good cause in light of the facts then before this court.  See Jepson, Inc. v. Makita Elec. Works, Ltd., 30 F .3d 854, 858-59 (7th Cir. 1994). 

In any case in which Judge Dow permits a portion of a document to be filed under seal, the party filing the document must also file a public-record version that includes the entire filing except for the portions that are being filed under seal.

There is a presumption that the public will have access to all court filings.  In light of this presumption, Judge Dow will not sign a protective order which allows counsel, in their absolute discretion, to decide which matters are to be deemed confidential and filed under seal.  Where the circumstances warrant, the parties should file a proposed order which specifies the categories of documents or other matters which may be subject to the order (e.g. trade secrets, medical records, personnel files) and a motion in which the parties set forth why a protective order is necessary as to each category.  The court will then independently review the motion and determine if the order should be signed. 

The issuance of a protective order in light of this Standing Order will constitute the court's determination, as required by Rule 26(c), that good cause existed for such issuance. Issuance of any protective order will not, however, be given binding effect as a determination of good cause for Rule 26(c) purposes if at any future time either party moves for relief from the limitations of the protective order. At that time, this court will engage in an appropriate balancing of the interests between privacy and public access in order to make a new determination of good cause in light of the facts then before this court.  See Jepson, Inc. v. Makita Elec. Works, Ltd., 30 F .3d 854, 858-59 (7th Cir. 1994). 

In any case in which Judge Dow permits a portion of a document to be filed under seal, the party filing the document must also file a public-record version that includes the entire filing except for the portions that are being filed under seal.

This Court strongly urges parties to exhaust settlement possibilities at the earliest practicable point in the litigation.  Parties appearing before the Court should expect to be continually asked about the settlement status of the case and invited to attend settlement conferences with the Court.  Parties who desire a settlement conference with the Court should request one in open court or by telephone from the Courtroom Deputy.  In cases that may proceed to a bench trial, any settlement conference likely will be referred to the Magistrate Judge.

Standing Order on Settlement Conferences

This Court strongly urges parties to exhaust settlement possibilities at the earliest practicable point in the litigation.  Parties appearing before the Court should expect to be continually asked about the settlement status of the case and invited to attend settlement conferences with the Court.  Parties who desire a settlement conference with the Court should request one in open court or by telephone from the Courtroom Deputy.  In cases that may proceed to a bench trial, any settlement conference likely will be referred to the Magistrate Judge.

Standing Order on Settlement Conferences

The court will set a briefing schedule by minute order. The court will set a briefing schedule by minute order.

The Court strongly encourages counsel to consider and to inform their clients of the efficiencies and potential cost savings to be gained by having cases tried before a United States Magistrate Judge. 

Magistrate Judge Consent Form

The Court strongly encourages counsel to consider and to inform their clients of the efficiencies and potential cost savings to be gained by having cases tried before a United States Magistrate Judge. 

Magistrate Judge Consent Form

Standing Order Regarding Final Pretrial Order in Civil Cases Before Judge Dow Standing Order Regarding Final Pretrial Order in Civil Cases Before Judge Dow

In order to provide a standard procedure that accomplishes the aims of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and simplifies pre-trial motions, the following procedures are to be followed unless otherwise ordered by the Court:

1. All persons presenting testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 must be disclosed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(A). See Musser v. Gentiva Health Servs., 356 F.3d 751, 756-58 (7th Cir. 2004).

2. Disclosures must be made within the time limit set for disclosure of Rule 702 opinion witnesses (or experts) in the scheduling order or, in the absence of an order, within the time periods prescribed in Rule 26(a)(2)(C).

3. The Rule 26(a)(2)(A) disclosure must specifically designate the witness as a person who may give testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, and/or 705. Even if the witness is not subject to the report requirement of Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the Rule 26(a)(2)(A) identification disclosure must include a written statement containing all Rule 702 opinions to be offered by that witness and the bases for those opinions in such a manner as to permit the opposing party to consider whether to depose the witness, to challenge the witness’ qualifications or opinions under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), or to retain rebuttal opinion witnesses. See Musser, 356 F.3d at 757-58.

4. Please keep in mind that “[d]isclosing a person as a witness and disclosing a person as an expert witness are two distinct acts.” Musser, 356 F.3d at 757.

5. Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a written report from certain categories of witnesses --- namely, witnesses who are retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony or employees of a party whose duties regularly include giving expert testimony. If a witness falls within the scope of Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the witness must comply fully with all of the report requirements of that Rule.

6. A treating professional, including a physician, nurse, psychologist, or similarly situated witness, must be disclosed pursuant to Rule 26(a)(2)(A) in order to present testimony under Rule 702. See Musser, 356 F.3d at 756. A treating professional is not considered a retained expert for purposes of Rule 26(a)(2), and thus need not submit a report, if the treating professional’s testimony (a) is based on observations made during the course of treatment, (b) was not “acquired or developed in anticipation of litigation or for trial,” and (c) is based on personal knowledge. See Zurba v. United States, 202 F.R.D. 590, 591 (N.D. Ill. 2002). In other words, it is only when the treating physician gives opinions beyond the scope of the physician’s own observation and treatment that the physician is considered a “retained” expert for purposes of Rule 26(a)(2)’s report requirement. Id. at 592. Thus, the fact that a treating physician proposes to offer opinion testimony on prognosis, causation, or permanency of injuries does not automatically render the physician a retained expert for Rule 26(a)(2) purposes. Id. However, to the extent that a treating physician’s proposed testimony – regardless of the specific subject of the testimony (i.e., prognosis, causation, permanency, etc.) – “goes beyond his personal involvement in the facts of the case and giv[es] an opinion formed because there is a lawsuit” (Griffith v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad, 233 F.R.D. 513, 518 (N.D. Ill. 2006)), a report will be required unless the party seeking to present the opinion testimony in question obtains leave of Court, in advance, to dispense with the report requirement because of “undue hardship” (id. at 519).

7. Compliance with Rule 26(a)(2) and this Court’s procedures set forth above is required before a Rule 702 opinion witness (or expert) may be designated as a trial witness in the final pretrial order.

8. Any motions challenging Rule 702 witnesses filed under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), must be filed at least sixty days prior to trial unless otherwise ordered by the Court. In order to provide a standard procedure that accomplishes the aims of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and simplifies pre-trial motions, the following procedures are to be followed unless otherwise ordered by the Court:

1. All persons presenting testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 must be disclosed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(A). See Musser v. Gentiva Health Servs., 356 F.3d 751, 756-58 (7th Cir. 2004).

2. Disclosures must be made within the time limit set for disclosure of Rule 702 opinion witnesses (or experts) in the scheduling order or, in the absence of an order, within the time periods prescribed in Rule 26(a)(2)(C).

3. The Rule 26(a)(2)(A) disclosure must specifically designate the witness as a person who may give testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, and/or 705. Even if the witness is not subject to the report requirement of Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the Rule 26(a)(2)(A) identification disclosure must include a written statement containing all Rule 702 opinions to be offered by that witness and the bases for those opinions in such a manner as to permit the opposing party to consider whether to depose the witness, to challenge the witness’ qualifications or opinions under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), or to retain rebuttal opinion witnesses. See Musser, 356 F.3d at 757-58.

4. Please keep in mind that “[d]isclosing a person as a witness and disclosing a person as an expert witness are two distinct acts.” Musser, 356 F.3d at 757.

5. Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a written report from certain categories of witnesses --- namely, witnesses who are retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony or employees of a party whose duties regularly include giving expert testimony. If a witness falls within the scope of Rule 26(a)(2)(B), the witness must comply fully with all of the report requirements of that Rule.

6. A treating professional, including a physician, nurse, psychologist, or similarly situated witness, must be disclosed pursuant to Rule 26(a)(2)(A) in order to present testimony under Rule 702. See Musser, 356 F.3d at 756. A treating professional is not considered a retained expert for purposes of Rule 26(a)(2), and thus need not submit a report, if the treating professional’s testimony (a) is based on observations made during the course of treatment, (b) was not “acquired or developed in anticipation of litigation or for trial,” and (c) is based on personal knowledge. See Zurba v. United States, 202 F.R.D. 590, 591 (N.D. Ill. 2002). In other words, it is only when the treating physician gives opinions beyond the scope of the physician’s own observation and treatment that the physician is considered a “retained” expert for purposes of Rule 26(a)(2)’s report requirement. Id. at 592. Thus, the fact that a treating physician proposes to offer opinion testimony on prognosis, causation, or permanency of injuries does not automatically render the physician a retained expert for Rule 26(a)(2) purposes. Id. However, to the extent that a treating physician’s proposed testimony – regardless of the specific subject of the testimony (i.e., prognosis, causation, permanency, etc.) – “goes beyond his personal involvement in the facts of the case and giv[es] an opinion formed because there is a lawsuit” (Griffith v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad, 233 F.R.D. 513, 518 (N.D. Ill. 2006)), a report will be required unless the party seeking to present the opinion testimony in question obtains leave of Court, in advance, to dispense with the report requirement because of “undue hardship” (id. at 519).

7. Compliance with Rule 26(a)(2) and this Court’s procedures set forth above is required before a Rule 702 opinion witness (or expert) may be designated as a trial witness in the final pretrial order.

8. Any motions challenging Rule 702 witnesses filed under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), must be filed at least sixty days prior to trial unless otherwise ordered by the Court.

Jury Questionaire

Standing Order On Jury Selection Procedures Jury Questionaire

Standing Order On Jury Selection Procedures

The Seventh Circuit Model Jury Instructions are to be used to the extent they apply. If Illinois law provides the applicable standards, the Illinois pattern instructions should be used for the substantive elements of the particular cause of action. The Seventh Circuit Model Jury Instructions are to be used to the extent they apply. If Illinois law provides the applicable standards, the Illinois pattern instructions should be used for the substantive elements of the particular cause of action.

Standing Order on Trial Procedure  Standing Order on Trial Procedure 

Please contact Judge Dow’s court reporter, Kristin Ashenhurst, at least 5 business days before the start of any proceeding for which you anticipate needing daily or hourly transcript and/or a realtime feed or rough-draft transcript so that these services can be scheduled. A deposit may be required.

Contact Kris at Kristin_ashenhurst@ilnd.uscourts.gov or 312-818-6549.

Please contact Judge Dow’s court reporter, Kristin Ashenhurst, at least 5 business days before the start of any proceeding for which you anticipate needing daily or hourly transcript and/or a realtime feed or rough-draft transcript so that these services can be scheduled. A deposit may be required.

Contact Kris at Kristin_ashenhurst@ilnd.uscourts.gov or 312-818-6549.

Standing Order on Claim Construction Proceedings Standing Order on Claim Construction Proceedings

Arraignment/Bond/Detention Hearings

All Arraignments/bonds/detention hearings will be set before the designated Magistrate Judge with the following schedule to be set :

16.1 conference	7 Business days from Arraignment
Status	Set Status hearing before pretrial motions are due on Tuesday – Thursday at 9:30 a.m.

 

Pretrial Motions	14 Business days after 16.1 conference
Response	14 Business days after pretrial motions
Reply	7 Business days after response

Change of Plea - Counsel is requested to contact the judge’s courtroom deputy at least one day in advance of a change of plea hearing if the plea is not going forward. In addition, a draft copy of the proposed plea agreement should be delivered to the Courtroom Deputy, Room 1914, at least one day in advance of the date of the hearing. 

Arraignment/Bond/Detention Hearings

All Arraignments/bonds/detention hearings will be set before the designated Magistrate Judge with the following schedule to be set :

16.1 conference	7 Business days from Arraignment
Status	Set Status hearing before pretrial motions are due on Tuesday – Thursday at 9:30 a.m.

 

Pretrial Motions	14 Business days after 16.1 conference
Response	14 Business days after pretrial motions
Reply	7 Business days after response

Change of Plea - Counsel is requested to contact the judge’s courtroom deputy at least one day in advance of a change of plea hearing if the plea is not going forward. In addition, a draft copy of the proposed plea agreement should be delivered to the Courtroom Deputy, Room 1914, at least one day in advance of the date of the hearing. 

If you are a pro se litigant with a case in this district, the District Court Self-Help Assistance Program may be able to provide you with assistance regarding your case. The help desk attorney operates by appointment only. Appointments are made at the Clerk’s Office Intake Desk on the 20th floor or by calling 312-435-5691.

 

Use of the help desk attorney is not a substitute for an attorney. You should seriously consider trying to obtain professional legal assistance. Below are lists of organizations that may be able to offer you free or low-cost legal assistance or a referral to an attorney if you can afford to pay for legal services. 

• Free or low-cost legal services
• Referral Services

Additional Resources/Information:

• Filing a Civil Case Without An Attorney: A Guide For The Pro Se Litigant
• Title VII and Section 1981: A Guide for Appointed Attorneys in the Northern District of Illinois
• The Americans With Disabilities Act An Age Discrimination In Employment Act: A Guide for Appointed Attorneys in the Northern District of Illinois
• Local Rule 56.2 - Notice to Pro Se Litigants Opposing Summary Judgment

If you are a pro se litigant with a case in this district, the District Court Self-Help Assistance Program may be able to provide you with assistance regarding your case. The help desk attorney operates by appointment only. Appointments are made at the Clerk’s Office Intake Desk on the 20th floor or by calling 312-435-5691.

 

Use of the help desk attorney is not a substitute for an attorney. You should seriously consider trying to obtain professional legal assistance. Below are lists of organizations that may be able to offer you free or low-cost legal assistance or a referral to an attorney if you can afford to pay for legal services. 

• Free or low-cost legal services
• Referral Services

Additional Resources/Information:

• Filing a Civil Case Without An Attorney: A Guide For The Pro Se Litigant
• Title VII and Section 1981: A Guide for Appointed Attorneys in the Northern District of Illinois
• The Americans With Disabilities Act An Age Discrimination In Employment Act: A Guide for Appointed Attorneys in the Northern District of Illinois
• Local Rule 56.2 - Notice to Pro Se Litigants Opposing Summary Judgment

Judge Dow does require a courtsey copy of newly filed complaints Judge Dow does require a courtsey copy of newly filed complaints

Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project 

Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project