Please contact Judge Chang’s court reporter, Judith Walsh, at least five business days before the start of any proceeding for which you need daily, hourly, or a realtime transcript or feed so that the service can be scheduled in advance. A deposit may be required. Contact Judy at Judith_Walsh@ilnd.uscourts.gov or 312.702.8865.

The Court will set all newly filed cases for an initial status hearing around 40 days from the filing of the complaint (cases removed from state court might have a quicker initial status). The Court also will set a deadline for filing a joint initial status report. The status report shall provide information about the case using the format of the template that will be posted on the docket of each case.

Timing

            All motions must be filed no later than the third business day (excludes federal holidays and weekends) before the day the motion is to be heard. For examples, absent a holiday, (1) a motion filed on a Monday may be noticed for the upcoming Thursday; and (2) a motion filed on a Thursday may be noticed for the following Tuesday. For civil cases and non-custodial criminal cases, the motion schedule is Monday through Thursday at 8:30 a.m. For in-custody defendants in criminal cases (and if the motion requires the defendant’s presence), the motion schedule is Monday through Thursday at 9 a.m.

            The exception to the 8:30 a.m. and 9 a.m. hearing times is as follows: if there is an already-scheduled status hearing at a different time, then the motion may be noticed for that already-scheduled time. This applies only to the time of the hearing; all other in-advance requirements must be met.

Courtesy copies

            Generally, the Court does not accept courtesy copies. Please do not prepare them and do not try to deliver them. If you think that a courtesy copy would be truly, truly invaluable, then please email (copying the other side) the courtroom deputy for guidance.

Electronic filing / OCR searchable text

            With regard to CM/ECF filing, for any word-processed filing (e.g., briefs and memoranda), counsel shall convert the document into a .pdf document by printing or publishing to .pdf, rather than manually scanning a paper copy into .pdf, in order to generate searchable optical character recognition (OCR) text. For any filing of any kind (including exhibits in support of a motion or any Local Rule 56.1 Statement), counsel must run an OCR conversion on it before uploading it onto CM/ECF. To do this in Adobe, go to Tools, Text Recognition, In This File, and select All Pages. If you see the message, “Acrobat could not perform recognition (OCR) on this page because this page contains renderable text,” click “Ignore future errors in this document,” and click OK.

Other requirements (including conferral)

    Before filing a motion, the movant’s counsel (or the movant, if pro se) must ask opposing counsel (or the opposing party, if pro se) whether there is an objection to the motion, and the motion must state that the conferral occurred, or if not, why not. If there is an objection, the movant must note that fact on the first page of the motion and of any separate brief in support. Joint, uncontested, and agreed motions must be so identified in both the title and the body of the motion. Trial dates and discovery deadlines generally will not be reset except by written motion.

            In addition to the 15-page limit on briefs, Local Rule 7.1, the Court applies the other format requirements of Local Rule 5.2(c) to electronically filed briefs. See Local Rule 5.2(c) for those page-size, font-size, margin, and spacing requirements. Counsel shall not respond to motions by correspondence with the Court.

Emergency matters must be of such a nature that a delay in hearing them would cause serious harm.  Requests to set a hearing on an emergency motion shall be made to the courtroom deputy with as much advance notice as possible.  All reasonable efforts must be made to give actual notice to opposing counsel.

Judge Chang encourages attorneys and their clients to provide substantive speaking opportunities to less experienced attorneys during any of the Court's proceedings, including motion and status hearings, settlement conferences, claim-construction hearings, pretrial conferences, evidentiary hearings, sentencings, and trials. To that end, Judge Chang allows more than one attorney per side to speak during any proceeding. So lead attorneys may not only confer with the newer attorney to suggest additional argument or examination questions, they also may jump-in as reasonably necessary to deliver additional argument or even to conduct additional witness examination.

Discovery Motions

            The Court believes that parties can and should work out most discovery disputes and thus discourages the filing of discovery motions. The Court will not consider any discovery motion unless the movant has complied with the meet-and-confer requirement of Local Rule 37.2. This applies not only to motions to compel, but also applies to motions to quash discovery or for protective orders against discovery. The motion must state with specificity when and how the movant complied with Local Rule 37.2. Remember that compliance with Local Rule 37.2 requires a good-faith effort to resolve discovery disputes and also requires that the conferral take place face-to-face or by telephone. The exchange of correspondence will almost never be good enough to comply with Local Rule 37.2.

            All parties should be fully prepared to argue any discovery motion on the date that it is presented. The Court most often will rule on discovery motions after hearing argument at the motion call and without further briefing (though sometimes it is plain that briefing is needed). If after hearing 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.

            Parties must immediately notify the Court if they are withdrawing (or narrowing) any previously filed discovery motions.

Discovery Sequence

            Remember that there is generally no particular sequence in which discovery must occur, and that one party’s failure or inability to respond to discovery will not excuse any other party’s prompt compliance. Remember too that the pendency of a motion, such as a motion to dismiss, does not necessarily operate as a stay of discovery, although very often one or both parties might be justified in asking for a stay.

Discovery Continuances

            Judge Chang sets realistic discovery deadlines at the initial status hearing, based on a close review of the pleadings and the initial status report. The parties must issue discovery and respond to discovery as needed to meet the discovery deadlines, which means planning ahead so that there is no last-minute scramble as the deadline approaches. Also, any motion to extend discovery must be presented in writing (after conferral with the other side), filed in advance of the fact discovery deadline, and must demonstrate good cause for the extension.

            Judge Chang generally does not set a case for trial until it is really ready for trial (that is, all discovery is done, dispositive motions denied, and settlement efforts exhausted). That means that the parties get a real trial date, not a placeholder, which allows the parties and witnesses to better plan and allows the Court’s trial calendar to be a real one, with no double-booking, very rare continuances, and very rare last-minute settlements. The important consequence is that Judge Chang’s trial calendar is rarely occupied very far into the future, because the trial calendar contains only real trial dates, so the parties can get a faster, real trial date when the case is ready to go. It also means, however, that the parties should be alert that the “there is no trial date” excuse to extend discovery is not persuasive to Judge Chang.

Limit on the Number of Requests to Admit

            The Court sets a limit of 25 requests to admit, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36, per side. Per “side” means parties represented by the same counsel.

Motions to strike are strongly disfavored. Custom Vehicles, Inc. v. Forest River, Inc., 464 F.3d 725, 727 (7th Cir. 2006) (Easterbrook, J., in chambers). For example, if a party believes that the other side's brief contains inaccurate facts or that the other side's Local Rule 56.1 statement (in summary-judgment briefing) contains an unsupported assertion, then the complaining party should so argue in the response or reply brief, or in the responsive 56.1 statement. Motions to strike almost always would require the Court to decide significant issues (and, indeed, the underlying motion) on the merits and would multiply the briefs (because the other side should be allowed to respond). Id. at 727. Only on very rare occasions is a motion to strike appropriate, such as when an entire brief or 56.1 statement is defective. When it is appropriate, the motion must be made very promptly after the filing of the purportedly-offending brief or statement.

Too often litigants are unaware of the efficiencies to be gained by having their cases tried before United States Magistrate Judges.  The court strongly encourages counsel to inform their clients of this option, and to discuss it with opposing counsel.  

Magistrate Judge Consent Form

Judge Chang follows the Local Patent Rules for the Northern District of Illinois in all utility patent cases, unless ordered otherwise. In the initial status report, please set forth the specific proposed dates for each step of the case under the Local Patent Rules.

This Court urges parties to undertake settlement negotiations at the earliest practicable point in the litigation. Parties who desire a settlement conference should request one in open court or by telephone from the courtroom deputy. In bench trials, settlement conferences are usually referred to the magistrate judge. Parties who participate in a settlement conference with Judge Chang must follow the standing instructions for settlement conferences available at the link below.

Standing Instructions for Settlement Conferences

Before submitting a proposed order of dismissal, counsel should review the following Seventh Circuit cases which discuss the retention of federal jurisdiction to enforce the terms of a settlement agreement: Blue Cross and Blue Shield Ass’n v. American Express Co., 467 F.3d 634, 636 (7th Cir. 2006) and Shapo v. Engle, 463 F.3d 641, 646 (7th Cir. 2006). The parties also may wish to review the article, “What’s an Attorney to Do? Ensuring Federal Jurisdiction Over Settlement Agreements in Light of Recent Seventh Circuit Cases,” by Judge Denlow, which may be accessed at: _assets/_documents/_forms/_judges/DENLOW/FederalJurisdiction.pdf.

Generally speaking, Seventh Circuit decisions hold that dismissals “with prejudice” leave the Court without jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement. Accordingly, in most cases, the parties would be well advised to submit a proposed order that either (a) provides for dismissal with prejudice if the settlement terms have already been fulfilled (e.g., payment has been made), but make no reference to retention of jurisdiction; or (b) provides for the case to be “dismissed without prejudice with leave to reinstate on or before [date far enough in the future to fulfill all settlement terms]” and that “in the event a motion to reinstate is not filed on or before [date far enough in the future to fulfill all settlement terms], the case shall be deemed, without further order of the Court, to be dismissed with prejudice.”

Proposed orders should not be filed directly onto the docket, even if the parties agree on the order. Instead, unless the Court has directed otherwise, a party must file a motion asking the Court to enter the order, and attach a copy of the proposed order to the motion. For example, even proposed orders such as stipulated protective orders require the Court's approval before actually being given full effect and entered. Contemporaneously with filing a motion to enter a proposed order, the movant must also e-mail the proposed order to the e-mail address of the assigned judge, Proposed_Order_Chang@ilnd.uscourts.gov. This will allow the Court to edit the order if necessary. The subject line of the e-mail must include the case number and name, the docket number of the corresponding motion, and the title of the order that is proposed. Attachments must be submitted to the court in a format compatible with Microsoft Word, which is a "Save As" option in most word processing software. And proposed orders should also be served on all parties.

Trial Procedures

Voir Dire Standard Letter 

Please click here for instructions on the Jury Evidence Recording System (JERS).

Standing Order Governing Proposed Pretrial Orders

Standing Order Governing Criminal Pretrial & Trial Procedures

Motions for summary judgment and responses must comply with Local Rules 56.1(a) and 56.1(b), as well as the procedures outlined herein. All statements of undisputed material facts and their 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.

The Local Rules are not mere technicalities. Failure to abide by the Local Rules may result in the Court striking briefs, disregarding statements of fact, deeming statements of fact admitted, and denying summary judgment. See Cracco v. Vitran Exp., Inc., 559 F.3d 625, 632 (7th Cir. 2009).

The movant shall not file more than 80 statements of undisputed material facts without prior leave of the Court. The respondent shall be limited to 40 statements of undisputed material facts without prior leave of the Court. In complex cases, the Court might request that the parties submit a timeline of events in addition to the statements of undisputed material facts.

Please read the Court's Case Management Procedures on "Motions to Strike Strongly Disfavored." This Court's general rule against such motions applies whole-heartedly to summary-judgment briefing and Local Rule 56.1 statements.

With regard to CM/ECF filing, for any word-processed filing (e.g., briefs and memoranda), counsel shall convert the document into a .pdf document by printing or publishing to .pdf, rather than manually scanning a paper copy into .pdf, in order to generate searchable optical character recognition (OCR) text. For any filing of any kind (including exhibits in support of a motion or any Local Rule 56.1 Statement), counsel must run an OCR conversion on it before uploading it onto CM/ECF. To do this in Adobe, go to Tools, Text Recognition, In This File, and select All Pages. If you see the message, “Acrobat could not perform recognition (OCR) on this page because this page contains renderable text,” click “Ignore future errors in this document,” and click OK.

No Early Summary Judgment Motions. If a party wishes to file a summary judgment motion before the close of all discovery (fact and expert), then the party must move for permission to do so. More often than not, either Civil Rule 56(d) applies (so the non-movant is entitled to more discovery) or, even if discovery on a specific issue is complete, it is much more efficient to consider all summary judgment issues at the end of all discovery. The motion for permission must explain why it is sensible to proceed with summary judgment mid-discovery. Also, the proponent should consider that it is almost always wasteful to have two rounds of summary judgment, that is, one round after fact discovery and a second after expert discovery.