Smith v. Diaz

Opinion

1 2 3 6 7 C. JAY SMITH, Case No. 20-cv-04335-HSG

8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND CASE 9 v. SCHEDULE

10 RALPH DIAZ, et al., 11 Defendants.

12 13 The parties stipulated, and the Court agreed, that the evidentiary hearing should be vacated 14 and all pending factual issues should be decided by jury trial in light of the Supreme Court’s 15 recent opinion in Perttu v. Richards, No. 23-1324, 605 U.S. --, 2025 WL 1698783, at *3 (U.S. 16 June 18, 2025). See Dkt. No. 176. The Court accordingly set an in-person case management 17 conference on July 1, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. to discuss how to proceed. The parties should be 18 prepared to discuss their availability for a pretrial conference and trial. Given the age of this case 19 and its current posture, the trial needs to occur by the end of this year. 20 The Court provides the following dates for discussion. Before the case management 21 conference, the parties must meet and confer to determine which of the following windows will 22 work for them. The Court expects the parties to collectively clear their calendars to enable a trial 23 in at least one of these windows. 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // I Pretrial Conference 2-Week Trial! Option 1 | September 23, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. October 20, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. 2 September 30, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. _| October 27, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. November 4, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. December 1, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: 6/25/2025

7 iatwobe S. GILLIAM, JR. □□ 3 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12

© 15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 IP 28 ' This is the maximum trial length: the Court will set stringent time limits that likely will result in a substantially shorter trial than this.