Mareiners, LLC v. Anomatic Corporation

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio
DecidedJuly 11, 2025
Docket2:22-cv-03433
StatusUnknown

This text of Mareiners, LLC v. Anomatic Corporation (Mareiners, LLC v. Anomatic Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mareiners, LLC v. Anomatic Corporation, (S.D. Ohio 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

MAREINERS, LLC,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:22-cv-3433 JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. v. Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

ANOMATIC CORPORATION,

Defendant.

ORDER AND AMENDED TRIAL SCHEDULE This matter is before the Court on a Joint Motion to Lift Stay and Reschedule Trial Date filed by the parties. (ECF No. 128.) On June 26, 2025, the parties engaged in a productive but ultimately unsuccessful mediation. (Id. PageID 5953.) Since the parties were unable to resolve their dispute, they ask the Court to lift the stay of this litigation (ECF No. 127) and amend the Amended Order Setting Trial Date and Settlement Conference (ECF No. 57). The parties do not agree, however, on how the case schedule should be modified. (ECF No. 128.) The Court finds that good cause exists to extend the case schedule and the Joint Motion is therefore GRANTED IN PART (ECF No. 128). The Court will AMEND the Amended Order Setting Trial Date and Settlement Conference (ECF No. 57) and LIFT the stay of this litigation (ECF No. 127). The parties request for oral argument on the post-discovery motions (ECF Nos. 96–99, 101–02) is HELD IN ABEYANCE. The amended summary of the schedule is below. Further explanations and instructions are found in the body of this Order. Summary: 10/18/2024 Close of Discovery. 11/15/2024 Dispositive motions and Daubert motions deadline. 12/23/2025 Confidential assessment for Settlement Conference due.

12/30/2025 at 9:30 a.m. Settlement Conference before the Court.

1/5/2026 Statement of witnesses, designations of deposition portions, and exhibit lists due. If jury trial proposed case-specific jury instructions to be served on opposing counsel.

1/9/2026 Stipulations, motions in limine, agreed jury instructions, and proposed case-specific jury instructions due.

1/16/2026 Memoranda in opposition to motions in limine and objections to case-specific jury instructions due.

1/26/2026 Final pretrial order and general areas for voir dire questions due.

1/30/2026 at 9:00 a.m. Final Pretrial Conference.

2/9/2026 at 9:00 a.m. Trial: voir dire; opening statements; presentation of evidence.

A. Trial Date.

This matter is set for a Final Pretrial Conference and Trial. Voir dire will begin on the morning of the date set for trial, with the trial immediately following.1 The Court will not continue the trial date except upon written motion supported by an affidavit demonstrating exceptional circumstances, made immediately upon the party’s or counsel’s receipt of notice of the existence of the exceptional circumstances. The Court uses a trailing docket, setting three to five civil cases to begin on the same day. Cases are tried in the order they were filed. If a case set for the same day goes to trial, then the parties and counsel in the next case shall remain prepared to go to trial on a standby basis for a period of two weeks unless the Court orders otherwise.

1 Provisions concerning voir dire and jury instructions do not apply in non-jury cases. Counsel shall inform the Court immediately if this is a non-jury case or if there is a controversy concerning whether a jury trial is required or permitted. Under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161-3174, and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 50(a), the Court will give preference to any criminal matters it has set to take place the same time as the trial in this case. B. Settlement Conference.

This case is set for a Settlement Conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(a)(5) and (c)(2)(I) before The Honorable Edmund A. Sargus, Jr., at the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, 85 Marconi Boulevard, Room 301, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Counsel and the parties shall adhere to the following with respect to the Settlement Conference: (1) The trial attorney for each party must attend the conference.

(2) The parties or principals with settlement authority shall be present. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(c).

(3) Lack of discovery will not excuse active participation in the conference.2

(4) No later than fourteen (14) days before the conference, each plaintiff must submit to counsel for all opposing parties a fully documented, written settlement demand; and

(5) No later than ten (10) days before the conference, each opposing party must respond, in writing, to each settlement demand fully documenting that party’s position.

(6) On the date set out above, each party shall submit directly and only to Chambers a letter (confidential assessment), not to exceed three pages, (a) explaining the party’s theory of the case, (b) indicating its position on settlement (in monetary terms, if applicable), and (c) setting forth all conditions necessary to achieve settlement (including non-monetary terms). The Confidential Assessment letter should be submitted by email to Sargus_Chambers@ohsd.uscourts.gov.

2 If the parties have requested extensions of time in which to file memoranda for dispositive motions, the fact that the Court has not yet ruled on the pending motions will not excuse active participation in settlement. (7) Before the conference, counsel shall discuss with their clients whether this case would be appropriate for a summary jury trial or some other form of alternative dispute resolution. S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 16.3.

Any questions regarding the Settlement Conference should be addressed to the Court’s Judicial Assistant, Christin Werner, or Career Law Clerk, Lauren Hilsheimer, at (614) 719-3240. C. Expert Witnesses. Motions directed at expert witnesses shall be filed on the same date as dispositive motions. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 589 (1993); Fed. R. Evid. 702. D. Statement of Witnesses. The parties shall submit to the Court, and serve on opposing counsel, the names, addresses, and occupations of all witnesses they intend to call at trial, with a brief summary of the witness’ testimony (two to three sentences), the purpose of that testimony, and the major issue about which the witness will testify. Failure to list a witness, except upon a showing of good cause, will preclude the use of that witness at trial. The witness lists shall comport with all of the requirements of Rule 26(a)(3)(A). E. Depositions. The parties shall submit to the Court, and serve on opposing counsel, the designations of any portions of depositions they intend to offer as evidence at trial.1 Failure to make a designation, except upon a showing of a good cause, will preclude the use of the undesignated portion of a deposition at trial. The designation of deposition portions shall comport with all of the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3). F. Exhibits.

3 Do not designate portions to be used only for impeachment on cross-examination. The parties shall mark their documentary or physical evidence in advance of trial. Each party shall exchange and file a list containing a brief description of each item of documentary or physical proof the party intends to offer in evidence as an exhibit at trial.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (Supreme Court, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mareiners, LLC v. Anomatic Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mareiners-llc-v-anomatic-corporation-ohsd-2025.